Manufacturing Weapons AFTER Passing Through Airport Security Checkpoints?

This BLUNDERBUSSness Class shotgun was created out of ordinary items which can be purchased from merchants within the secure area of virtually any airport in the United States. Photograph courtesy of Evan Booth. Click on the photograph to view a video demonstration of this and other “weapons.”

Ever since the tragic events of September 11, 2001 — where ordinary box cutters were used to kill pilots and overtake the cockpits of four airplanes during their flights — I have always thought that virtually anything can be used as a weapon aboard a commercial aircraft.

Evan Booth apparently had similar thoughts. The difference between Booth and I is that he actually demonstrated what he thought by converting actual ordinary items into potentially lethal weapons — something I had no desire to ever attempt to prove.

FlyerTalk member skwashd first discovered a weapon created by Booth called BLUNDERBUSSness Class with items — including but not limited to a hair dryer, magazines, a condom, a can of energy drink, batteries, tape, a refrigerator magnet clip, body spray, and dental floss — which could be purchased after passing through an airport security checkpoint.

Booth then created CERRSBERR — a crossbow constructed from such items as an umbrella and a luggage handle — and MURICA, which uses such materials as a copy of the Constitution of the United States and a pencil sharpener in the shape of the Washington Monument. Both “weapons” are constructed with many of the same materials used in the construction of BLUNDERBUSSness Class.

These “weapons” apparently earned Booth an unannounced visit from the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States — prompting FlyerTalk member beofotch to ask: “Is he a Patriot or a Villian?”

It is important to note that Booth disclaims the following:

“All Terminal Cornucopia weapons were constructed in a lab. At no point were any weapons built, handled, or transported in or near an airport.

“Because the findings of this research (thus far) are arguably common sense, it is in this researcher’s opinion that they fall outside of the purview of Responsible Disclosure. That said, all findings have been reported to the proper authorities, whom were granted the option of establishing a timeline for remediation and/or disclosure. No instructions have been given to that end.

“Don’t break the law. Don’t build weapons if you don’t know how to do it safely. Don’t be stupid.

I always thought of myself as creative — but not in this particular case. My thoughts were that a passenger could sharpen a pencil to a point that it in and of itself could be used as a potential weapon. The same could be said about plastic cutlery. That Washington Monument pencil sharpener sure looked like it could be potentially dangerous in the wrong hands.

The Transportation Security Administration has typically overreacted to stunts like this in the past. For example, Richard Reid — known infamously as the Shoe Bomber — attempted to blow up a commercial aircraft operating as American Airlines flight 63 from Paris to Miami on December 22, 2001. The eventual response by the Transportation Security Administration was to require that all passengers remove their shoes before being screened at airport security checkpoints and a secondary screening awaited passengers who refused — a policy I always thought was ridiculous. FlyerTalk members generally agree, calling the policy the shoe carnival, which they have wanted to end for years — despite the perception that some airports actually implement the policy better than others.

The liquid ban was derived from the fear of terrorists being able to mix otherwise harmless liquid ingredients aboard an airplane into some explosive bomb. You cannot even bring a bottle of water through an airport security checkpoint. FlyerTalk members have been wanting for the liquid ban to be repealed for years. Although at one point passengers were not allowed to carry liquids aboard commercial aircraft at all — liquids could only be carried in checked luggage — the ban was revised in September of 2006 to allow passengers to carry travel-sizes toiletries three ounces or less which fit comfortably in one quart-sized, clear plastic, zip-top bag through airport security checkpoints in the United States.

What are the chances of the Transportation Security Administration overreacting to the “weapons” invented by Booth? Is it time to heavily restrict what vendors at airports can sell — or perhaps shut down those vendors altogether?

I obviously do not believe that for a second — but you never know with the Transportation Security Administration…

Email:
Twitter:
@flyertalk
Facebook:
flyertalk
More in:

Comments (Showing 4 of 4)

  • Points Scrounger at 8:38am November 30, 2013

    Although not specifically a prohibited item, I have read posts at FT stating that they have flagged passengers carrying 9v batteries when they notice those during screening.

  • not2017 at 9:53am November 30, 2013

    I think putting this type of article on Flyertalk was a bad idea. This draws attention to something that shouldn’t have attention drawn to it. As far as TSA, I think maybe they need to stop selling batteries that can be used in this manner. As far as Booth having been visited by the FBI, he deserved it. Put videos on the web that instruct how to make bombs? I’m surprised that he was just “visited”!

  • BarbiJKM at 8:09am December 01, 2013

    I agree with not2017. Why publicize this, so all the loonies who didn’t know how to do it now have complete instructions and a road map? Yes, the info is already out there, but why make it easier to find? And don’t give TSA any ideas about what ELSE to restrict!

  • harvyk at 2:36pm December 01, 2013

    I still remember the day the handle on my carry-on bag broke (thankfully this was after security on the last leg of a long haul) and out came a very long, very sharp length of metal, which would have been a very effective weapon in it’s own right.

    The thing is one of the reasons why 9/11 was so successful wasn’t because they got weapons onboard, it was because until that point standard operation for a hijacking was for passengers to remain seated in their seats, the plane would land somewhere, and after negotiation the hostages would be freed. There have been several attempts to hijack planes since 911, and the would be terrorists where rushed on by virtually every passenger. They barely had the chance to stand up, let alone use any sort of weapon or explosive they had with them.

Leave Reply

You must be a logged in member to post a comment. Click here to Register.