RadioGirl

Clearly the difficult word here is "realistic". You (TSA) keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Let's review. According to TSA:

Same shape, color, detail as a real gun but only 2 inches long = Realistic

Full size non-functioning implementation of a weapon that is not remotely real (light saber cane) = Realistic

Image of a fictional weapon (Optimus Prime) silk-screened on a t-shirt = Realistic (okay, to be fair, that was the UK not TSA but this idiocy is contagious.)

Embroidered image of a pistol on a purse = Realistic

Child-sized Pirates of the Carribean plastic swords from Disney World = Realistic (enough for the TSA "Occifer" to play with them after confiscating them)

Toy plastic hammer owned by a mentally disabled man = Realistic

If I had a 2" embroidered light saber on a t-shirt, someone in TSA would call it a "realistic replica."

gsoltso

Realistic replica by my definition (and according to the training I have had) is something that could easily be confused with a real weapon. In this case, it does not appear to be a realistic replica due to the size. If it is not a functioning weapon, or something that could be easily confused as a real weapon, then there should be no problem with it.

The only case I can see being made for not allowing this item to go is if it is a functioning weapon of some sort - which does not appear to be the case.

Another little known item that can be problematic is cap guns and the caps that go with them, the caps are actually deemed explosives/ammunition depending on which group you listen to. They are not allowed in carryon baggage - so if this item is a functioning cap gun, there may be a technical reason it was not allowed.

Boggie Dog

Are Disney Pirates of the Caribbean plastic toy swords realistic replicas?

The problem seems to be in how the uneducated TSA defines this term.

Carl Johnson

No, it wasn't a functioning cap gun. Who would be shooting it?

So <deleted>, is the clerk that didn't pay attention to the training and thus failed to follow the rules going to be fired?

Boggie Dog

In my opinion it seems this TSA clerk violated this persons rights, illegally deprived them of property (theft), and violated TSA policy by either not calling police when finding a weapon or violating TSA SOP by calling a harmless item a gun. Not only should the clerk be fired but they should be prosecuted for crimes committed.

Caradoc

Redundant. Keep in mind that this is an organization that not only hires, but maintains the employment of, people who state that 1" toys are "weapons," and that Pirates of the Caribbean plastic cutlasses are "weapons," and that cupcakes are "weapons."

These are people who are entirely unemployable in any other position due to their ineducability. Or possibly because they enjoy being thugs. Or both.

Caradoc

Only if they A) liked the shirt and B) thought it would fit them.

InkUnderNails

Well, that will learn me. Just this weekend I remarked that the TSA must be losing a lot of their stupidity from the lack of threads about stupid things. I state my opinions as I trade stocks, buy before they go down and sell before they go up.

Boggie Dog

Or C) figure they can fence stolen goods.

Carl Johnson

How could they think it would fit them?

jkhuggins

Why would <deleted> have any ability to answer this question? I seriously doubt he has access to the chain of command to know what disciplinary action (if any) is taken against another TSO --- much less have the ability to repeat that information in a public forum. (Look at how many times the official TSA representatives fail to answer questions about personnel actions --- and those are the folks who actually know what's going on.)

I'm a little disturbed by how much this thread has become about <deleted> and his responses (or lack thereof) regarding this incident. Shouldn't this thread be about the sock monkey?

[Four pages in, and nobody's made the obvious joke about sock puppets ... sheesh ...]

safetysecond

Shouldn't we take this to the TSA illogical conclusion? If the gun could be real then the sock monkey could be a real LEO as well.

Caradoc

We're not talking about a shirt on a sock monkey. We're talking about the TSA's use of their own mysterious "SSI" rules to steal, er, ah, confiscate, uh, hmmm, "appropriate" items for their own use.

The comment was about a shirt with a logo on it that the TSA would then confiscate because it had a "realistic representation of a fictional weapon" on it, i.e., a two-inch lightsaber logo.

The whole sockmonkey gun incident simply reinforces the public perception of the TSA as a collective of defectives with more authority than they should be entrusted.

And that's a good thing, because the TSA is a collective of defectives with more authority than they should be entrusted.

Caradoc

It is. It's just unclear if they're talking about the traveling sockmonkey whose toy prop gun was stolen, or the sockmonkeys in the blue shirts with tin badges who stole the toy prop gun from the traveling sockmonkey.

chollie

You're right, of course, but it would be great if once in a while <deleted> (or any other TWO) could point out that Bob is addressing the matter or SSI directives are being updated and all personnel 'educated' so this doesn't happen again.

Unfortunately, I Bet if I went through the same checkpoint with the same item tomorrow while the same screener was working, I'd get the same result.