Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Airline Passenger Walked Past Security With a Loaded Gun Magazine (apnews.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the in-flight-magazine dept.

An airline passenger "passed a security checkpoint with a loaded gun magazine," reports the Associated Press, citing information from an airport duty manager: Bob Rotiski said the passenger who apparently had visited a shooting range packed a loaded magazine in his carry-on bag. He said an officer identified the magazine during security screening, but the wrong bag was pulled from the line. By that time, the passenger had already left the checkpoint with the bag containing the magazine....

Security lines were closed and flights were temporarily grounded at a San Francisco International Airport terminal...for nearly an hour, and United Airline flights out of Terminal 3 were grounded Saturday morning as TSA officers looked for the passenger.
"Rotiski said the lines reopened after officers located the passenger and brought him back for re-screening."

10 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Theater by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ain't nothing more entertaining than the play that is security theater.

    1. Re:Theater by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or the reality TV that is politics.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re: Theater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This kind of scenario is quite rare. The vast majority of breaches take place without anyone ever realising.

  2. Re:FUD by geoskd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    THEN and ONLY then will you ever have actual security.

    Yes, but who is going to defend me from you?

    I have my own gun, and I use it to defend myself from you. I shoot you, you shoot me. In the end, I'm still dead. Now, if neither of us had a gun in the first place, we would both still be alive.

    The second amendment does not permit you to carry gun to defend yourself from violent crime. If that were the case, the best defense would be banning weapons altogether. The second amendment is there so that you can defend yourself against tyranny. The part you missed is that the defense of liberty must be paid with blood, and that invariably includes the blood of the defenders.

    Put another way, you have the right to bear arms, only in so far as that right is exercised in defense of liberty, but there is no guarantee that the process wont kill you. A weapon can't protect life, only take it

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  3. No the system actually worked here by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. They did identify the clip
    2. But they searched the wrong bag.

    WOuld you, as a hijacker, think that was a great way to smuggle in a gun? No. while (2) happened it's a low probability event. Not something you would count on.

    Thus as a deterrent for overt attacks this is worked. Not saying the process can't somehow be subverted in some other way but this particular example is not a good one to point at and yell "security theater".

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re: No the system actually worked here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Protected the public from nothing. Wasted time and money. Job well done.

    2. Re: No the system actually worked here by markdavis · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >"Protected the public from nothing. Wasted time and money. Job well done."

      +1 exactly

    3. Re:No the system actually worked here by fafalone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well as it turns out, (1) is also a low probability event, as their own internal tests show that it's quite easy to walk right on through with dangerous items. They fail 80-95% of the time. Locking the cockpit doors and changing passenger attitudes is what stopped more terror attacks, not sexually assaulting little kids and old women in wheel chairs, making everyone take off their shoes, conducting virtual strip searches, or any other of ridiculous security theater they've got going.

  4. Nothing to see here by ebonum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reality: He would have gotten on the plane had a crappy meal, a fraction of a can of Coke(tm) and arrived at his destination. A disaster was not averted. 100's of lives were not saved. A government rule was enforced. Nothing more.

    TSA headline: Our agent heroes saved you AGAIN! Countless lives saved and counting. btw. We demanddeserve another 10 billion in funding.

  5. Re: FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Now, if neither of us had a gun in the first place, we would both still be alive.

    No. The larger, stronger person more skilled in hand to hand combat would be alive. Your statement ignores thousands of years of history which clearly identifies people killing each other before guns came along.