6 ms·

ABC ran pretty much this same story in 2010: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loaded-gun-slips-past-tsa-screeners/story?id=12412458 http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/

ABC ran pretty much this same story in 2010: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loaded-gun-slips-past-tsa-screeners/story?id=12412458 http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/loaded-gun-slips-past-tsa-scre... According to one report, undercover TSA agents testing security at a Newark airport terminal on one day in 2006 found that TSA screeners failed to detect concealed bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times. A 2007 government audit leaked to USA Today revealed that undercover agents were successful slipping simulated explosives and bomb parts through Los Angeles's LAX airport in 50 out of 70 attempts, and at Chicago's O'Hare airport agents made 75 attempts and succeeded in getting through undetected 45 times.

sdoering 11y ago
Meaning, that the system did not work then and does not work today in providing security. It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average. So it really seems to be just security theater... It is not designed to work - and you could argue it being this way by design. It detects the idiots (smugglers & the little guys, et al) - but if something severe happens the only consequences are making the system more secure by adding to it. not by questioning it. That way the systems is kept alive and politicians have the ability to be seen doing something, after a tragedy happens. Everyone is happy - except Mrs. Taxpayer - but she does not get asked. # cynisism of
- k2enemy 11y ago
  The TSA is also succeeding in another one of their goals. Their very public and very disruptive "security" measures are a visceral reminder that reinforces people's beliefs that there are terrorists behind every corner and that we need to be protected from them. And as long as we're afraid of terrorists the government can institute more sinister measures such as mass surveillance and domestic spying.
  - serge2k 11y ago
    Honestly, I have had more issues with TSA jerks than with the NSA.
    - benburwell 11y ago
      That you know of, anyway :)
  - hkmurakami 11y ago
    I wonder if the the subliminal conditioning to think there are terrorists around the corner also make us distrust the guy lurking around the streetcorner.
    - tracker1 11y ago
      You mean that no-good, pinko commie!? I don't think it's all that new... it's just another witch hunt... nobody is found, and the cycle continues... we need more military, more weapons, more useless tools, and projects to make a few people on this inside millions of dollars.
  - rhino369 11y ago
    I'd argue essentially the opposite. That TSA is there to make people believe they are safe from terrorism. Fear of flying crippled the airline industry post 9-11. People have a very irrational fear of flying. It's the safest mode of travel, yet, single incidents panic people and multiple panic the entire country.
    - ConceptJunkie 11y ago
      That may be true, or at least was true when 9/11 was still fresh in our minds, but the TSA is also there to get us used to the idea of being manhandled, questioned and/or detained by government officials. El Al has had a better security record without the digital "strip searches" and junk-grabbing. The USA accomplish the same... if it wanted (i.e., Congress/the unions/everyone but the taxpayers).
      - chimeracoder 11y ago
        > El Al has had a better security record without the digital "strip searches" and junk-grabbing. Actually, El Al is just as bad as well. El Al also had an open and explicit policy of racial profiling until last year (when it was ruled illegal in court to practice this policy openly[0]). If you are white and carry a US or Israeli passport, you'll breeze right through. But the experience of flying El Al is very different if you: a) have an Arab name, or b) "look" Arab, or c) are Palestinian. El Al has been very heavily criticized by Arab Jews (yes, they exist) as well as non-Arab and Arab Muslims and non-Muslim Palestinians for treating the aforementioned groups very badly. There have been multiple cases of Arabs, Muslims, and/or Palestinians winning civil suits against El Al for their shocking treatment of these groups - in many ways worse than what the TSA is usually criticized for doing. By the way, this doesn't happen only in Israel, but in other countries as well (including the US), which let El Al conduct their own security procedures at foreign airports for flights to Israel. In at least one lawsuit, the plaintiffs won and were awarded five figures in part because their mistreatment by El Al happened in New York, where open[1] racial profiling is illegal. [0] emphasis on openly. [1] emphasis on open.
- rayiner 11y ago
  TSA isn't theater so much as it is insurance. Do you want to be the President or political party that disbands TSA? Look at how much flak Hilary Clinton got for a few Americans dying in an actual warzone. What do you think happens when terrorists blow up a flight from Topeka to Minneapolis, whether or not TSA would've stopped it? As for Mrs. Taxpayer, she does get asked, and she supports the TSA: http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/americans-views-tsa-positive-negative.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/americans-views-tsa-positi.... Only 12-13% of people polled think TSA is doing a bad job or isn't effective.
  - craigmccaskill 11y ago
    Which says more about the media than the merits of the TSA. The majority don't know who edward snowden is either (or as john oliver found out -- think he's the wikileaks guy). Fact of the matter is that the TSA is doing a bad job and is a colossal waste of time and money. People should be outraged at the misuse of $7.4 billion from the annual budget. The media should be calling out the US government for mismanaging tax dollars.
    - rayiner 11y ago
      If the program actually outraged people, taking about it would draw viewership and the media would talk about it. But in the grand scheme of things $7 billion is a drop in the bucket compared to the real hot button issues. Especially considering that TSA is paid for by user fees and not general purpose tax dollars.
      - craigmccaskill 11y ago
        But if only 12-13% of people think they're doing a bad job then they are just not informed on the topic and what they think is really of no consequence. The media is to blame for not educating the general population on this. People get outraged talking about single government officials claiming a few thousand dollars of expenses they shouldn't, I think that most people would get somewhat upset if they knew that the TSA by and large was a complete waste of time and money which provided almost zero additional security. As to the drop of water argument, I don't see that as particularly valid. Either it's a waste of money or it isn't. Wasting money should be cut out whenever possible. Happy to debate the merits of the program being a waste or not, but not going to dive into a conversation about how it's OK to waste money frivolously.
- a3n 11y ago
  > It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average. Or the feeling of fear.
- jakeogh 11y ago
  "It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average" Or worse; it's there to condition us.
gesman 11y ago
Failed TSA agents would reply - "...ohh but we saw that these were only simulated explosives and we let them through as they didn't pose any danger!"
- dsl 11y ago
  I have worked with simulated explosives in the past for training. They are designed to be nearly indistinguishable from the real thing, and have trace amounts of material that will cause detectors and trained dogs to trigger. Literally the only thing that saves you from going to super jail when working with these types of objects is a signed letter of authorization.

sdoering 11y ago

Meaning, that the system did not work then and does not work today in providing security. It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average. So it really seems to be just security theater... It is not designed to work - and you could argue it being this way by design. It detects the idiots (smugglers & the little guys, et al) - but if something severe happens the only consequences are making the system more secure by adding to it. not by questioning it. That way the systems is kept alive and politicians have the ability to be seen doing something, after a tragedy happens. Everyone is happy - except Mrs. Taxpayer - but she does not get asked. # cynisism of

k2enemy 11y ago
The TSA is also succeeding in another one of their goals. Their very public and very disruptive "security" measures are a visceral reminder that reinforces people's beliefs that there are terrorists behind every corner and that we need to be protected from them. And as long as we're afraid of terrorists the government can institute more sinister measures such as mass surveillance and domestic spying.
- serge2k 11y ago
  Honestly, I have had more issues with TSA jerks than with the NSA.
  - benburwell 11y ago
    That you know of, anyway :)
- hkmurakami 11y ago
  I wonder if the the subliminal conditioning to think there are terrorists around the corner also make us distrust the guy lurking around the streetcorner.
  - tracker1 11y ago
    You mean that no-good, pinko commie!? I don't think it's all that new... it's just another witch hunt... nobody is found, and the cycle continues... we need more military, more weapons, more useless tools, and projects to make a few people on this inside millions of dollars.
- rhino369 11y ago
  I'd argue essentially the opposite. That TSA is there to make people believe they are safe from terrorism. Fear of flying crippled the airline industry post 9-11. People have a very irrational fear of flying. It's the safest mode of travel, yet, single incidents panic people and multiple panic the entire country.
  - ConceptJunkie 11y ago
    That may be true, or at least was true when 9/11 was still fresh in our minds, but the TSA is also there to get us used to the idea of being manhandled, questioned and/or detained by government officials. El Al has had a better security record without the digital "strip searches" and junk-grabbing. The USA accomplish the same... if it wanted (i.e., Congress/the unions/everyone but the taxpayers).
    - chimeracoder 11y ago
      > El Al has had a better security record without the digital "strip searches" and junk-grabbing. Actually, El Al is just as bad as well. El Al also had an open and explicit policy of racial profiling until last year (when it was ruled illegal in court to practice this policy openly[0]). If you are white and carry a US or Israeli passport, you'll breeze right through. But the experience of flying El Al is very different if you: a) have an Arab name, or b) "look" Arab, or c) are Palestinian. El Al has been very heavily criticized by Arab Jews (yes, they exist) as well as non-Arab and Arab Muslims and non-Muslim Palestinians for treating the aforementioned groups very badly. There have been multiple cases of Arabs, Muslims, and/or Palestinians winning civil suits against El Al for their shocking treatment of these groups - in many ways worse than what the TSA is usually criticized for doing. By the way, this doesn't happen only in Israel, but in other countries as well (including the US), which let El Al conduct their own security procedures at foreign airports for flights to Israel. In at least one lawsuit, the plaintiffs won and were awarded five figures in part because their mistreatment by El Al happened in New York, where open[1] racial profiling is illegal. [0] emphasis on openly. [1] emphasis on open.
rayiner 11y ago
TSA isn't theater so much as it is insurance. Do you want to be the President or political party that disbands TSA? Look at how much flak Hilary Clinton got for a few Americans dying in an actual warzone. What do you think happens when terrorists blow up a flight from Topeka to Minneapolis, whether or not TSA would've stopped it? As for Mrs. Taxpayer, she does get asked, and she supports the TSA: http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/americans-views-tsa-positive-negative.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/156491/americans-views-tsa-positi.... Only 12-13% of people polled think TSA is doing a bad job or isn't effective.
- craigmccaskill 11y ago
  Which says more about the media than the merits of the TSA. The majority don't know who edward snowden is either (or as john oliver found out -- think he's the wikileaks guy). Fact of the matter is that the TSA is doing a bad job and is a colossal waste of time and money. People should be outraged at the misuse of $7.4 billion from the annual budget. The media should be calling out the US government for mismanaging tax dollars.
  - rayiner 11y ago
    If the program actually outraged people, taking about it would draw viewership and the media would talk about it. But in the grand scheme of things $7 billion is a drop in the bucket compared to the real hot button issues. Especially considering that TSA is paid for by user fees and not general purpose tax dollars.
    - craigmccaskill 11y ago
      But if only 12-13% of people think they're doing a bad job then they are just not informed on the topic and what they think is really of no consequence. The media is to blame for not educating the general population on this. People get outraged talking about single government officials claiming a few thousand dollars of expenses they shouldn't, I think that most people would get somewhat upset if they knew that the TSA by and large was a complete waste of time and money which provided almost zero additional security. As to the drop of water argument, I don't see that as particularly valid. Either it's a waste of money or it isn't. Wasting money should be cut out whenever possible. Happy to debate the merits of the program being a waste or not, but not going to dive into a conversation about how it's OK to waste money frivolously.
a3n 11y ago
> It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average. Or the feeling of fear.
jakeogh 11y ago
"It only seems to be there to instill the feeling of security in Jane/Joe Average" Or worse; it's there to condition us.

gesman 11y ago

Failed TSA agents would reply - "...ohh but we saw that these were only simulated explosives and we let them through as they didn't pose any danger!"

dsl 11y ago
I have worked with simulated explosives in the past for training. They are designed to be nearly indistinguishable from the real thing, and have trace amounts of material that will cause detectors and trained dogs to trigger. Literally the only thing that saves you from going to super jail when working with these types of objects is a signed letter of authorization.