Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TSA Screeners Can't Detect Weapons (and They Never Could) (arstechnica.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the but-they-can-grope-with-the-best-of-them dept.

JustAnotherOldGuy writes: TSA screeners' ability to detect weapons in luggage is "pitiful," according to classified reports on the security administration's ongoing story of failure and fear. "In looking at the number of times people got through with guns or bombs in these covert testing exercises it really was pathetic. When I say that I mean pitiful," said Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), speaking Tuesday during a House Oversight hearing concerning classified reports (PDF) from federal watchdogs (PDF). "Just thinking about the breaches there, it's horrific," he added. A leaked classified report this summer found that as much as 95 percent of contraband, like weapons and explosives, got through during clandestine testings. Lynch's comments were in response to the classified report's findings.

22 of 349 comments (clear)

  1. Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by loony · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... giving you the feeling that your government cares and reacted to 9/11 and other threats is.

    Peter.

    1. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by whitroth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yup. As Bruce Schneir refers to it, "security theater".

      Note that the weapons the hijackers allegedly used were ILLEGAL TO CARRY ON PLANES before then, and they got them on in other ways.

                      mark

    2. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Security Theater is nothing more than the Wizard of Oz. The problem is, nobody learned that lesson, in spite of nearly universal knowledge of that movie's pivotal scene.

      The problem is, the security theater only makes it more difficult, and now we're finding out it actually doesn't make it all much more difficult.

      IMHO the chances of hijacking a plane became much less likely to be successful after 9/11, because they broke the cardinal rule of hijacking, and turned the plane into a weapon. People on planes already know they are dead if a hijacker takes over, and will respond accordingly.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Major+Blud · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Note that the weapons the hijackers allegedly used were ILLEGAL TO CARRY ON PLANES before then, and they got them on in other ways."

      Are you sure about that? I was able to bring my pocket knife through security before 9/11 as long as the blade was just a few inches.

      Wikipedia confirms this as well:

      "Box cutters and similar small knives were allowed onboard aircraft at the time."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    4. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Informative

      This, and also the fact that they reinforced and lock the cockpit doors from now on.

      The TSA has not stopped ANY attempts at bombing or hijacking airliners since 9/11. Various other methods have, but the TSA has been singularly useless.

    5. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problems are that there are vast swaths of the population that believe that the TSA is actually doing something to keep them safe. I have a cousin who is 13 years younger than I am who is a weekend warrior (MN national guard reserves) and he fully believes the line that all of this is necessary and prevents terrorist attacks. He is too young to really remember before 9/11/01 and so doesn't really know what has changed. Pointing out that the 3 things that have actually prevented another 9/11 doesn't register with him and he insists that our foreign adventurism has helped the most. He may very well be correct as he may be privy to information that I am not but I have yet to see any evidence showing this to be the case.Then you have people like my mother who will openly state that "At least they are trying to do something". Then add in the "if you have nothing to hide", and "so long as it keeps us safe" groups and this won't change for a very long time.

      As I have pointed out here before I have accidentally brought banned items through security without any real effort in concealing them, they were left in coat pockets, and the TSA never once found them. Yet every time I bring my camera through I get to play 20 questions with the otherwise unemployable.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    6. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This, and also the fact that they reinforced and lock the cockpit doors from now on.
      The TSA has not stopped ANY attempts at bombing or hijacking airliners since 9/11. Various other methods have, but the TSA has been singularly useless.

      Reinforced cockpit doors do sod all. Even without a reinforced cockpit door the crew could have kept them out of the cockpit if they wanted to using a co-pilots foot .

      What has made us tons safer after 9-11 is that now there would be reasonable quantity of the passengers who would challenge the hijackers, as recently shown on a French train. Previously most air hijackings were about taking hostages and using them to plead for some worthless chum of yours to be released, as soon as it became clear that the hijackers were never interested in your survival or their own it made trying to subdue them the safest option, no matter how dangerous that seemed.

      If you wanted to fly a plane into a building now you would have to steal an empty one first.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    7. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The government knows damn well that the TSA is security theater -- someone just forgot to tell this particular elected official.

      Security theater can be great as a deterrent, but once everybody starts shouting about how it's not real, then its deterrent effect is decreased. So we can either tell people to shut up about it, or eliminate the facade, but increased security isn't an option, for two reasons:

      1) Nobody can be vigilant against mostly non-existent threats for hours and days and years on end, except the most paranoid, OCD people, who aren't hireable anyway. That's why bouncers are effective -- people are constantly trying to sneak in, and bouncers know they're going to catch people. Most other security guards know they'll never, ever catch anyone, because nobody ever tries, and their attention suffers as a result. It's not that they don't want to do their job; it's that the reality of their job is incredibly tedious. It becomes about going through the motions most of the time, and maybe making an effort every so often.

      2) Real security takes time, and that pisses people off. Maybe not in the immediate wake of a catastrophic security failure, but days or weeks later, it will. Patience will run thin. Moreover, the biggest advantage of flying is convenience -- it's fast. Once that convenience goes away, its popularity will decline.

      Honestly, it doesn't matter though. Security has diminishing returns, like anything else, and no target can be fully protected. We can't, even collectively, control all of the variables. And when the risks are infinitesimal to begin with, then taking steps to lower them even more is usually a wasted effort. Better to focus on having procedures in place to handle things when the worst case happens.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
    8. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by ubrgeek · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes you can.

      --
      Bark less. Wag more.
    9. Re: Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be fair, I don't always start reading a comment from the subject line either ;-)

      Putting half of the first sentence of your post in the subject line should be a capital offense. If you oppose the death penalty for religious or moral reasons, then you should mod them down instead.

    10. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by Coren22 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, .22 casings would make sense. Think of the nailgun used to put a nail in concrete, not your typical wood nailgun.

      http://www.homedepot.com/p/Ram...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    11. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thats me too, last time I flew was in Sept 2004. In 2005, I turned down a pretty good job that I'd actually gotten a tentative offer on. The job entailed about 25% travel, and after much thought, I told them, "Thanks but no thanks...". The manager I'd have been working for told me they were having trouble filling the position, as I was the 3rd offer they'd made where the potential employee turned them down because of the travel... Really glad I turned them down as I found a MUCH better job about a month later with ZERO need to interface with the TSA....

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  2. And yet..... by clifwlkr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nothing happened. No hijackings, no downed planes, absolutely nothing. Maybe we don't need all of this security theater after all and could just leave our shoes on and take some water with us through the gate then? Save a few tax dollars?

    Of course it will go the other way and will be a huge call for more strict rules and procedures. Sigh.....

    1. Re:And yet..... by rlp · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nothing happened ...

      because the "shoe bomber" and the "underwear bomber" were stopped by alert passengers.

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
  3. Anecdotal evidence by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My sister watched the supervisor run her backpack through the xray 3 times before the screener notice the pen knife in it, and my mother actually succeeded in getting a small pen knife onto a plane by "forgetting" it was in her makeup kit. These incidents were years ago. And, they don't really matter; post 9/11, a knife would not be an effective weapon for highjacking a plane. When every passenger makes the assumption they are going to die anyway if they don't take out the highjacker, pretty much every passenger is going to attempt to jump the highjacker and take him out. Even with a knife, you'd be hard pressed to be 100 to 1 odds - people don't die fast enough.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Anecdotal evidence by Scutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Prior to 9/11, past hijackings were primarily of the "Take this plane to Havana!" type. People believed that if they complied, they' go home safely. 9/11 changed that forever. When you have no expectation that the plane is going anywhere but into the side of a building, you're not going to sit still and wait for it to happen, pen knife or no penknife. And the handful of incidents since have proven that completely. The passengers will tear a hijacker limb from limb with their bare hands if they have to.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  4. That's good to know by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's good to know that when they gently stroke my private parts, it is literally for nothing........

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:That's good to know by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just do what I do: look the TSA guy straight in the eyes, and in a high-pitched voice, say "Don't you wanna check my PACKAGE?!?" while thrusting your hips forward... nine out of ten times, they wave you through. One out of ten times, they caress you slowly and gently...

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  5. 95% of Contraband... by mythosaz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Look, I hate the TSA as much as (if not more than) the next guy, but can we be clear about the numbers?

    95% of contraband, which **includes, but is not limited to** weapons got through.

    What percentage of weapons, then?

    They might just be terrible at detecting forbidden fruits and vegetables.

  6. Oh god this ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now, I've never tried to bring a weapon on a plane ... but I've had one screener flag my suitcase in the security line, only to have another screener ask me "what did he see in your suitcase to flag you?", followed by me saying "if I knew that I wouldn't have put it in that suitcase".

    Then I asked if he'd show me the xray and I'd try to tell him what it was, he said I wasn't allowed. OK sir, shall I just stare at you as you demonstrate you have no idea of your own job? Or can I go now?

    And, on several occasions I've realized my laptop bag still had toothpaste, a Tide stick, and mouthwash in it -- and nobody noticed.

    TSA are inept, expensive, and annoying. And I very much doubt they can provably demonstrate they've ever actually stopped anything from happening.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  7. Who's Surprised By This? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Number of people surprised that the TSA is completely ineffective: 0.

    Not coincidentally, that's also the number of terrorists that the TSA has caught.

    They have saved us from the scourge of water bottles and decent sized toothpaste tubes, though.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  8. Guns not needed for security by sjbe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How will people respond accordingly if it's illegal to carry a gun into a flight?

    Newsflash. There are ways of dealing with Bad Guys other than shooting them. It doesn't even matter if the Bad Guys are armed themselves if the number of passengers is greater than the number of bullets. Anyone trying to hijack a plane today will get beaten down almost immediately by the passengers. No point in sitting quietly if you think you are going to die anyway.

    Is there an officer in each flight?

    Not relevant. Nobody is going to wait for the police. Anyone starts some shit on a plan now and half the passengers will curb stomp them and tie them up until the plane can land.