Slashdot Mirror
TSA: Gun Discoveries In Baggage Up 20% In 2015 Over 2014 (networkworld.com)
coondoggie writes: There was a 20% increase in firearm discoveries at TSA airport checkins from 2014's total of 2,212. It's an astounding number really, but the details get worse. The TSA goes onto say 2,653 firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at checkpoints across the country, averaging more than seven firearms per day. Of those, 2,198 (83%) were loaded. Firearms were intercepted at a total of 236 airports; 12 more airports than last year. Last year a TSA spokesman, when asked of the TSA has a theory on why so many more guns are being brought onboard airlines, Tweeted “The vast majority of passengers just tell law enforcement, ‘I forgot.’ We continue to remind passengers they can check them.”
Rape and homicide by minorities were also up in 2015 over 2014
Citation, please? Not trivial to find. Google is showing me a lot of stuff written in 2015 about 2013, which is how it usually works.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It is not surprising that there are ths many attempts, or that most of them are accidental. There are a staggering number of people flying, and a high number of guns in the US.
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (http://www.transtats.bts.gov/) says there were 689 million passenger enplanements. You can do the math, but approximately 2,000 guns found is nowhere near a concerning number. It sounds shocking on the face of it, but with a decade of record gun sales and a strong movement for people to carry concealed, I expected for more to be found.
More people are bringing guns or the TSA is getting better at finding them?
Women are the majority of gun owners
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160...
Gun ownership among men: 45%
Gun ownership among women: 12%
I live in Sweden: If ONE person here was found to have tried to bring a gun aboard a plane it would be such a sensation that it would be all over the news.
But so forgetful that you leave it in your carry-on accidentally?
It's not like they changed the rule about firearms on planes recently. That kind of irresponsibility should get you on some ATF no-buy list. If you can't be bothered to be cognizant of carrying a weapon, you shouldn't carry one.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Getting a gun on board isn't really very useful any more. The cabin door will be locked, and threatening to kill people isn't going to get them to open it. Shooting up the plane is unlikely to do enough damage to bring it down, especially since other passengers will immediately intervene. Maybe you could put a hole in a window, and force the aircraft to descend to a lower altitude and deploy oxygen masks, but that's about it.
The real reason to keep guns off aircraft is to stop morons being a pain in the arse with them, not terrorism. The last long haul flight I was on they gave me a metal knife to cut my dinner up with, because realistically what could I do with it?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Actually, the top 5 cities for violent crime are all cities lack gun control (4 of which are legally banned, by state law, from enacting gun control).
and cities like New York, with its strict gun control, is actually ranked one of the safest cities in the country.
Damn.
So much for your BS.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
I like how the summary implies horrible things that the majority of the guns were loaded, as if people were intending to do evil things with them. The truth is an unloaded gun is good for nothing more than a paperweight or a very inefficient club. I think this story is reflecting something: namely that more people are beginning to carry guns. What does concern me though is that this could also indicate that a lot of people new to guns are carrying them as well. You should never lose track of where your guns are; that's how guns get lost, stolen, or found(ie kids).
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2015/07/07/chicagonola.jpg
What's interesting to me is how stunningly higher the murder rates are than the gun-only murder rates: less than 18% of Detroit's murders were committed by a gun.
We should ban whatever they use the other 82% of the time.
Damn those peskier facts.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Not really a scare article. It's just the TSA issuing press releases trying to make it sound like they're doing a good job despite the fact that they fail 95% of the their own tests of their system.
As a European, I continue to be utterly bemused/scared by America's obsession with owning guns. I know all the arguments that usually get trotted out, they just sound like crazy talk to me.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Getting a gun on board isn't really very useful any more.
But on second thoughts, while shooting up a single plane wouldn't do much, think about how much terrorism you could do by shooting up an airport - although you don't need to go through security to do that.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
The first, fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments can be rolled back just as easily, especially once precedents are set.
They already have. The second is protected because people want their toys, not because they worry about the constitution.
In fact, the security line itself would make a great target for a terrorist. Pick a busy airport at a very busy time of year. Get a suitcase so it looks like you're going on a flight, walk to the security line and wait until you're in the middle of it. Once you've completed your task (and presumably you are dead, but that's not a problem for most terrorists), flights will be messed up for days in that airport. Time this with a couple of people in other airports and you'd mess up flights all over the country as people panic. (And then will come the "we've got to do something" legislation from politicians stripping away more of our freedom to "protect" us from everything.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
There is approximately one billion of passengers in United States, an approximate number which includes domestic, international and private aviation helicopters and planes.
Let's crunch some numbers: 2,700 handguns were discovered for one billion boardings equals to approximately one gun per 370,000 passengers.
Let's take into the prospective:
On average, statistically, in this country there is 1.1 weapon per every person. We do not break down by the type of gun or passenger, but three forgetful citizens out of one million is a really really low number.
Here are some sobering conclusions:
1. None of the passengers had intention of using the weapon. Why? Because nobody used. Because if they wanted to they would have.
2. Even if there would be no TSA, the safety would not deteriorate or decrease. Metal detectors manned by the private screeners could detect all the forgotten weapons. More: currently cockpit doors are locked as such, a handgun inside the plane is pretty much useless. Yes: you can shoot a hole or kill a passenger or two, but the rest of passengers will tear you apart.
So it all boils down to how the question is presented:
" Why so many guns were brought to the airport".
The real questions should have been following:
Question: "In a country with 400 million guns only less than 3,000 guns are brought to the airport. All of the owners meant to leave the gun in a checked in bag? Is existence, the cost, and the false sense of security of TSA justified?"
The real answer: "No. One segment fee of $5.60 is an evidence of mind boggling waste and incompetence. This $5.60 will only increase in the future. TSA should be disbanded and handling of the security should be up to the airports and the carriers".
Based on your comments, like most people, you believe that in order for citizens to have a right, it must be granted by the constitution. In fact, it is just the opposite. The constitution grants rights and responsibilities to the government and any responsibility not explicitly granted to the government remains the right of the people. Many of the founders specifically objected to the Bill of Rights for this reason because it made it seem like if the constitution wasn't giving a right to the people, then they didn't have that right. You don't only have the rights in the bill of rights. You have ALL rights unless a specific limitation is put in place in the constitution granting the government dominion over a particular activity. Do not fall into the trap of saying that if it isn't in the Bill of RIghts, it's not a right.
"I forgot" as an excuse for bringing a firearm on a plane should mean you are instantly put on a no-buy and no-fly list, and that any other guns you own must be turned over to authorities.
If you're so irresponsible that you can't remember that you're carrying a firearm, let alone a loaded one, onto a plane, then you're far, far, far too irresponsible to be trusted with a firearm under any circumstances. It very likely means you "forget" to put the guns properly in a safe or "forget" rules of responsible use, or "forget" who the hell knows what.
If you're so paranoid about terrorists that you'll try and sneak a firearm onto a plane "just in case" (and then cowardly enough to lie about why you did it, to boot) then you're probably not mentally stable enough to be a responsible firearm owner and the same rules should apply - no-buy, no-fly and your guns are confiscated.
I don't have a problem with responsible, sane gun ownership, but in no way, shape, or form does bringing a firearm onto a plane in your carry-on unless you're an air marshal, intersect with either "responsible" or "sane."
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Actually, I suspect the reason for the increase is fairly innocuous. As concealed weapons permits become more and more common, more people are getting used to carrying around concealed weapons without really thinking about it. So when they tell a TSA agent that they forgot they had it, they're probably being honest. They probably got up that morning, went through their usual routine (including putting their weapon in its holster or in their purse) and didn't think about the fact that they would be flying that day (or maybe the need to fly out came up unexpectedly later in the day).
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
It's just the TSA issuing press releases trying to make it sound like they're doing a good job despite the fact that they fail 95% of the their own tests of their system.
Exactly. A 20% increase in gun detections seems more likely that the TSA's miss rate has dropped to 94%, than that there are actually 20% more guns.
That won't stop people from spinning it as though there's been a massive rise in attempted terrorist hijackings, while the brave officers of the TSA continue to thwart each and every one. Those men and women are doing a hard job, and we should probably invest in more technology to help them do it. Is it budget season?
I can see that you extrapolated based on those three columns, but the graphic isn't exactly clear on how they're arriving at those numbers - they could be pulled from two totally different sets of data for all we know. In a clearer statement, "data collected by the FBI show that firearms were used in 68 percent of murders" in 2011.
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crim...
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
I thought the mantra was that gun owners are responsible. If they forget they have a loaded gun on them, they are clearly not responsible, by the very definition of the word.
... we could all just fly naked. Think of the advantages! No more worries about concealed weapons that are any larger than will comfortably fit in an orifice. An opportunity to really get to know your neighbor. Necessarily improved climate control -- no more flights that are too cold or too warm. And a complete lack of literalist religious folk on the aircraft, because for most of them appearing naked in public is an even bigger sin than allowing infidels to spread lies about the one true faith or failing to bring on the apocalypse so Jesus can return to usher in the Kingdom of Heaven.
The merely prudish would, of course, take the train, which would be a welcome burst of new business for alternative transportation. Throw in a little alcohol and a whole new meaning of "in-flight entertainment" could emerge as a new cultural norm. The increased happiness among fliers could lead us to world peace!
It's the perfect solution. At least as long as they have one of those boxes that say "your body must fit inside of this box in order to take this flight" -- for humans...
rgb
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
Even cops sometimes forget that they're carrying their guns, or reach down to draw their taser and accidentally draw their gun instead.
And when a terrorist comes on board with a legal CC weapon? How about when 4-6 of them do, as with the 9-11 hijackers? Two dozen people (4 terrorists and 20 armed citizens) in a firefight in an airplane at 30,000 feet is very likely to result in the same number of deaths (i.e. everyone in the plane) whether the terrorists take over the plane or not.
Remember - someone who intends to blow up or otherwise crash a plane to incite fear in the population is already a dead man who has already made peace with his God over dying that day. Threatening to shoot him (or her) to try and stop a takeover is not a viable deterrent.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The countdown for the Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:
Rank City
30 Chicago Heights, IL
29 Baton Rouge, LA
28 Buffalo, NY
27 Hattiesburg, MS
26 East Chicago, IN
25 Birmingham, AL
24 Desert Hot Springs, CA
23 Compton, CA
22 Myrtle Beach, SC
21 Fort Pierce, FL
20 Harvey, IL
19 Bridgeton, NJ
18 Flint, MI
17 Rocky Mount, NC
16 Pine Bluff, AR
15 Petersburg, VA
14 Newark, NJ
13 Baltimore, MD
12 Harrisburg, PA
11 Jackson, MS
10 Wilmington, DE
9 Trenton, NJ
8 Riviera Beach, FL
7 New Orleans, LA
6 Camden, NJ
5 Detroit, MI
4 Gary, IN
3 St. Louis, MO
2 Chester, PA
1 East St. Louis, IL
http://www.neighborhoodscout.c...
From what I hear, Israel figured this one out...security checkpoint isn't inside the airport, it's a checkstop one mile away where people are still in vehicles. Worst thing you can blow up is one, maybe two cars unless you are really packing a boom. Keep in mind anywhere near Israeli airports is basically a militarized zone, and that doesn't look 'American' to have guards with automatic rifles checking your stuff, but their security record is quite good considering the issues they have with their neighbours in the region.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
That simply is not true. Oakland California and two cities in Michigan (Flint and Detroit )fill the top 3spots. In Michigan municipalities can create gun control laws as long as they do not conflict with state laws and you essentially need a permit for a hand gun as well as a permit for most private sales of firearms. In Oakland, they just passed two gun control laws and are working on a third after the terrorist incident in San Bernardino. California already has some of the strictest gun control laws on the books. In fact, they have been sued over them, lost, and refuse to change them until an appeal is exhausted.
So when they tell a TSA agent that they forgot they had it, they're probably being honest.
One should never ever forget that they are carrying a device whose purpose is to kill people.
Gun ownership is a right. It's also a responsibility. Forgetting that you are carrying is a very bad sign.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Cities which relax gun controls see dramatic decreases in crimes but there are gun restricted cities with low crime rates. Those stats are definitely muddied with and colored by agendas across the board. Those trying to boost the stats want to call every crime where someone had an arm a violent crime to skew the stats or quality crime with the tag 'gun' as if it worse to get robbed at gunpoint than knife point. The truth is, with more guns about people are more likely to have them good and bad. Obviously the more guns that are around the more gun related accidents as well. It is also true that mass shootings are only successful in a gun free or gun restricted environment and the damage is minimized when people in the crowd can shoot back.
.308 rifles which are much more powerful than the AR15. Mostly people want AR15's for target practice or self defense. The AR15 "assault rifle" which isn't a real class of gun btw is desired for entertainment and target practice and to secure the home, not from the time when they come to take our guns but from the time when a foreign invader or a civil war occurs. Or more commonly when attacked by an armed city gang or crazy pumped up ranchers.
It is certainly true that as the president said, "No self respecting hunter needs an AR15." The AR15 is powerful enough for shooting people but generally isn't considered powerful enough to ensure a clean shot on a large deer and completely useless vs a bear. Instead hunters tend to use
I think some gun control is warranted, as in not allowing convicted felons and those with mental issues to own guns. Additionally, a safe gun handling and usage course should be a high school requirement.
As for types of weapon, if the military is allowed to have it the people should be allowed to have it which is a far cry from actually being able to afford it, large arms are expensive and it would take a large number of citizens, such as a community funded volunteer militia to be able to afford big arms. It's worth remembering that a reasonably intelligent person can read a couple library books and build explosives with far more deadly potential than what the military classifies as "small arms" which is the category all the guns that gun control ever talks about. The Constitution divides military power between citizens (and no, the national guard is not it) and the state so that the few need always fear the wrath of the many. Which was wise since there is no evidence of true democracy ever occurring except on the other side of the many getting fed up with the few. Currently arms are restricted to the degree this is not the case in the US.
The worst gun control actually takes two forms. First it is in the ATF definition of a gun, which essentially limits civilian owned firearms to 18th century technology. The second is the ATF redefining essentially all maintenance and gunsmithing you'd perform on guns to constitute "gun manufacturing" never mind that you started with a gun that was recorded when manufactured and ended with just that one gun. The second is Secretary Clinton, hijacking a federal body empowered to regulate organizations exporting military grade arms and expanding the list of military grade arms to include essentially all weapons, despite the fact that the military does not use them. The AR15 is a good example, the AR15 is the demilitarized civilian version of the M16 firing mechanism. The AK is a similar type of weapon that just didn't originate in the US. The idea that these are somehow more dangerous than other civilian arms being used for hunting is ridiculous. The AR and AK mechanical designs are reliable and effective military developed designs that are good at shooting a bullet when you want and not shooting a bullet you don't want to. Those designs can be resized and put in guns ranging from the most deadly to the least deadly.
With more modern arms we could build new types of projectile weapons that aren't essentially hundreds of little bombs in our pockets. We could build technology in t
The funny thing about guns in cities is that they are only loosely related.
Chicago. Last year. Same laws for the entire city. Some zip codes had NO shootings, and others had around 100. What is the difference? Poverty.
No surprise, but zip codes with no shootings have money. Zip codes with dozens of shootings have poverty. So, instead of focusing on the guns, why not focus on the REAL problem?
Does anybody think that lax gun laws would actually create shootings in areas with money? Chicago already HAS strict gun laws, and that does not seem to help much.
And before anybody says "The criminals get their guns from cities with looser laws," compare Chicago with Dallas. About the same size, but Dallas has more lax laws, and less homicide.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
Here is a challenge for you. Go to this page that has a convenient table with gun ownership and homicide rates. Copy and paste this table into your favorite spreadsheet. Make an X-Y scatter graph with "Gun ownership %" as the X axis and "Homicides per 100,000" as the Y axis. Add a linear trend line.
Hey, look at that! The trend is that more gun ownership is correlated with LESS homicide. It is a weak correlation, but it is there. OK, Washington DC has few guns, but by far the most homicides. Delete that row. Hey, look! The trend still holds!
Some people ding Wikipedia, but at least I trust in, in this instance, to be relatively unbiased, and they have links to the source data (FBI and Census Bureau).
Now, the nice this about THIS instead of some random article from some biased journalist is that the source data comes from someplace that you can trust, and you can do the math yourself, and draw your own conclusions.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
So given that there are 7 guns on airplanes everyday, can we assume that in years prior that was a good rule of thumb?
Why then are there not 7 highjackings every day?
Why are there not 7 air rage shootings everyday?
Could it be because most people carrying weapons aren't bad guys? They just want protection and don't mean to cause any harm? Certainly if they wanted to cause harm they could have.
Except that the underwear bomber wasn't caught by the TSA. He got on the plane just fine, the only reason he was caught was because his bomb didn't detonate, and just burned instead.
Talking with someone back then who said when he checks in baggage, he wants to carry on his pistol as valuable possession not to get lost in baggage. This was before 9-11 and I don't think they objected. I may have not remembered some details, I think airline would at least request it be placed with pilot.
Also before 9-11 another who loves to cook and he always brings his knives as carry on as these are expensive and doesn't want to get lost in baggage. Those were the days!
mfwright@batnet.com
They need to have their guns and rights to purchase and carry guns revoked for one year, and then pass a gun safety class to have your guns returned. If you can't be bothered to even remember that you are currently carrying a gun, you are in no condition to be using guns.
Actually, Air Marshalls carry the .357 SIG, a round that was chosen for its higher penetration than more standard 9mm or .40 SW rounds. The reason a round with better penetration was desired is that it is likely they will have to shoot through a seat and the fact that, despite what Hollywood says, shooting a window on a passenger jet will not explosively decompress the plane and cause people to get sucked out like they are in outer space.