Originally Posted by
TSORon
I was unaware we were playing a game. Does that mean that it has rules? @:-)
Cash: 1. Financing terrorism. 2. As concealment for prohibited items. 3. Put into a sock, some forms of cash make a very good bludgeon (you didn’t specify).
1. Irrelevant to whether or not a passenger poses a specific threat to the flight they intend to board that day.
2. Anything can be used to conceal other things. So, why the specific emphasis on large sums of money, and not, say, large quantities of clothing? Or large quantities of other forms of paper, like books or magazines?
3. By that standard, anything I bring aboard could be turned into a bludgeon. Shall we simply ban all passenger's personal possessions aboard an aircraft?
Originally Posted by
TSORon
Kiddie porn: Really? We live in a civilized society where such is universally prohibited.
I am hard pressed to think of a way that a passenger could use a photo of child pornography to hijack or destroy a commercial flight.
Originally Posted by
TSORon
Illicit Drugs: 1. The sale of is commonly used to finance terrorism. I know Phil will have a coronary over that, but the facts are the facts. 2. Dispersed as a weapon on board an aircraft it could be used to disable the passengers as well as the crew, causing a catastrophic event. 3. Again, put it in a sock...
1. Selling drugs aboard an aircraft is not likely to cause an immediate threat to the safety of that particular flight.
2. The same could be said for legal drugs. Heck, there's enough alcohol aboard the aircraft in the catering supplies to fuel a nice IED. Why treat illicit drugs differently than legal ones?
3. Socks don't kill people; people kill people.
Originally Posted by
TSORon
I see where your error is. You are assuming that TSA expects us to rely only on our TSA training. This of course is not true, the TSA and the government in general realizes that people have their own personal histories and education, and as such those histories and education can be of use in our current positions (most companies are much more likely to hire someone with experience than those without). We are not automations, we come to the job with life experience just as you have done for your job. I do not need to be trained by TSA to recognize a grenade, or marijuana, I have personal experience with both. And in any case, even if I had no such experience I would be required to report anything that I cannot identify to a supervisor who hopefully can.
And, as I've pointed out to you before, your lack of TSA training on recognizing those items creates liability for
you, if your reliance on your prior training leads to an incident. TSA will be quite happy to say "We never told Ron to treat [fill-in-the-blank] as a dangerous item", or, alternatively, "Ron should've known that [fill-in-the-blank] was dangerous." You'll be left hanging out to dry.
Originally Posted by
TSORon
Oh, goody!
I can turn a pair of scissors (permitted item) into a pair of knives (prohibited item) in just a few seconds. Also, knitting needles are permitted, even though they can create extremely clean puncture wounds. (I know this a little too well.) Clearly, the prohibition on sharp objects is so vague as to be useless.
Because the little 8-inch bats that the Louisville Slugger company sells as trinkets pose such a threat to aviation that the Louisville TSA confiscates them at the checkpoint. (I know; I've transited Louisville and seen the great big bin of bats at the checkpoint.) "Sporting Goods" is so vague as to be useless.
We have no argument here.
Pray tell, what's the difference between a six-inch knife and a six-inch screwdriver? Both would be effective weapons --- but the knife is prohibited and the screwdriver is permitted. "Tools" is so vague as to be useless.
Martial Arts & Self Defense Items
Explosive & Flammable Materials, Disabling Chemicals & Other Dangerous Items
Again, we have no argument here.
From my spot in the cheap seats, it looks like TSA is trying to prohibit anything that "might" be used as a weapon, or a component of a weapon. But as anyone who's watched MacGuyver knows, virtually any object can become a vital component in a weapon.
And, in the meantime, because TSA instructs TSOs how to handle items you suspect might indicate a law being broken but have (at best) incidental relevance to commercial airline safety, TSOs end up being distracted from looking for the things that are actually a threat. And, as we've seen, many TSOs seem to interpret the instruction "don't look for this stuff, but tell us if you find it" as "look for this stuff and tell us about it". That line seems to be too fine for some TSOs to navigate successfully.