Despite TSA's best efforts, prohibited items still get thru the security checkpoints
Jan 14, 2003, 10:15 pm
#31
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
Whether I do or not, do the economics of murder not apply? Regardless of whether I have kids, is it not the case that one can recognize the fact that millions of dollars are being wasted trying to prevent a single murder in a small space while the rest of the planet receives a grossly disproportionate amount of protection?
Procreation is not a prerequisite for understanding probability theory.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
Procreation is not a prerequisite for understanding probability theory.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TSACAE:
My guess is that you do not have kids. </font>
My guess is that you do not have kids. </font>
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
Jan 14, 2003, 10:16 pm
#32
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newport News, Va USA
Posts: 82
And no, I've not had anything stolen from me at the checkpoints. I know how to pack.
Well then spiff...just WHAT is your complaint? What we do IS constitutional. Implied consent is just that, consent. If you don't want your things searched. Take the bus or train. Easy solution huh?
Well then spiff...just WHAT is your complaint? What we do IS constitutional. Implied consent is just that, consent. If you don't want your things searched. Take the bus or train. Easy solution huh?
Jan 14, 2003, 10:17 pm
#33
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 227
Tazi, first off, hi! How's it going?
Second, your incident was clearly a case of the x-ray operator not doing his job properly and having nothing to do with someone doing random searches or not. The x-ray operator should have not let that bag out without first knowing that someone else would have control over it.
[This message has been edited by tmspa (edited 01-14-2003).]
Second, your incident was clearly a case of the x-ray operator not doing his job properly and having nothing to do with someone doing random searches or not. The x-ray operator should have not let that bag out without first knowing that someone else would have control over it.
[This message has been edited by tmspa (edited 01-14-2003).]
Jan 14, 2003, 10:18 pm
#34
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
Did I say it was illegal? No.
I think it's sick and disgusting and flies in the face of the principles upon which this country was founded. But I did not say it was illegal. Hey, until recently cockfighting was legal in Oklahoma. It must be ok because it's legal, right?
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
I think it's sick and disgusting and flies in the face of the principles upon which this country was founded. But I did not say it was illegal. Hey, until recently cockfighting was legal in Oklahoma. It must be ok because it's legal, right?
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TSA@CAE:
And no, I've not had anything stolen from me at the checkpoints. I know how to pack.
Well then spiff...just WHAT is your complaint? What we do IS constitutional. Implied consent is just that, consent. If you don't want your things searched. Take the bus or train. Easy solution huh? </font>
And no, I've not had anything stolen from me at the checkpoints. I know how to pack.
Well then spiff...just WHAT is your complaint? What we do IS constitutional. Implied consent is just that, consent. If you don't want your things searched. Take the bus or train. Easy solution huh? </font>
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
Jan 14, 2003, 10:24 pm
#36
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BWI
Programs: AA PLT and that's that!
Posts: 8,349
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tmspa:
Tazi, first off, hi! How's it going?
Second, your incident was clearly a case of the x-ray operator not doing his job properly and having nothing to do with someone doing random searches or not. The x-ray operator should have not let that bag out with first knowing that someone else would have control over it.</font>
Tazi, first off, hi! How's it going?
Second, your incident was clearly a case of the x-ray operator not doing his job properly and having nothing to do with someone doing random searches or not. The x-ray operator should have not let that bag out with first knowing that someone else would have control over it.</font>
I agree completely that the x-ray operator screwed up but it is obviously not an isolated incident. Several of the recent evacuations we have heard about in the news have been because something the screener saw managed to 'get away'. I wondered how that could happen until I experienced it myself. The fact of the matter was, the wand guy was busy doing something else and didn't pick up my bag.
I have to agree with Spiff on the unwarranted searches. If you don't buzz and nothing suspicious shows up in the machine then it is highly unlikely, and not worth the effort and inconvenience to search someone again.
Jan 14, 2003, 10:26 pm
#37
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newport News, Va USA
Posts: 82
Did I say it was illegal? No.
Did I say illegal? No. I said it was constitutional, well within the realm of constitutionality. The Constitution is one stretched document...so many groups tugging at it to justify their position. It has become a cliche.
Did I say illegal? No. I said it was constitutional, well within the realm of constitutionality. The Constitution is one stretched document...so many groups tugging at it to justify their position. It has become a cliche.
Jan 14, 2003, 10:29 pm
#38
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newport News, Va USA
Posts: 82
I have to agree with Spiff on the unwarranted searches. If you don't buzz and nothing suspicious shows up in the machine then it is highly unlikely, and not worth the effort and inconvenience to search someone again.
True, but sometimes the AIRLINES choose individuals to be selected for further screening. We have no control over that and must comply. They use a computer system to randomly choose. So if you are chosen, you get the full screening. That is coming from the AIRLINES, not us.
True, but sometimes the AIRLINES choose individuals to be selected for further screening. We have no control over that and must comply. They use a computer system to randomly choose. So if you are chosen, you get the full screening. That is coming from the AIRLINES, not us.
Jan 14, 2003, 10:30 pm
#39
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
Popular, but not right. Just like your agency is currently. It took the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery, but your agency definitely flouts the spirit of the 4th Amendment. Hopefully it will not take another Amendment to put a stop to your agency's actions.
Very ironic you use that quote. It's paraphrased from Ben Franklin. "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." Your agency pulls this country in a most unwelcome direction. I will continue to oppose this shift towards an authoritarian government and society.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
Very ironic you use that quote. It's paraphrased from Ben Franklin. "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." Your agency pulls this country in a most unwelcome direction. I will continue to oppose this shift towards an authoritarian government and society.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TSA@CAE:
principles upon which this country was founded
Slavery was popular then too. Things change and we must change with them.
"We hang together for we will certainly hang seperately."</font>
principles upon which this country was founded
Slavery was popular then too. Things change and we must change with them.
"We hang together for we will certainly hang seperately."</font>
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 01-14-2003).]
Jan 14, 2003, 10:32 pm
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TSA@CAE:
FWAAA....Well, since you mentioned the LAW. Carrying pointy things such as pocket knives in carry-on bags is against the LAW. Made so by inclusion on the prohibited item list.</font>
FWAAA....Well, since you mentioned the LAW. Carrying pointy things such as pocket knives in carry-on bags is against the LAW. Made so by inclusion on the prohibited item list.</font>
49 USC 46505 proscribes carrying a concealed dangerous weapon on board an aircraft. No authority exists to allow the TSA to alter the definition of a concealed dangerous weapon. The ban on, and confiscation of (since abandoned) of corkscrews, cigar cutters, blunt scissors, knitting needles, crochet hooks, etc. was clearly unlawful. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act did not permit the Secretary to criminalize the carrying of non-weapons.
Disagreement should be accompanied by a citation to the particular section. Thanks in advance.
[This message has been edited by FWAAA (edited 01-14-2003).]
Jan 14, 2003, 10:36 pm
#41
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 227
I disagree. Read Section on what happens to prohibited items.
http://www.tsa.dot.gov/public/display?content=15
http://www.tsa.dot.gov/public/display?content=15
Jan 14, 2003, 10:38 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tmspa:
I disagree. Read Section on what happens to prohibited items.
http://www.tsa.dot.gov/public/display?content=15</font>
I disagree. Read Section on what happens to prohibited items.
http://www.tsa.dot.gov/public/display?content=15</font>
Jan 14, 2003, 10:46 pm
#43
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newport News, Va USA
Posts: 82
The TSA website is not the United States Code.
No, but it is legal for us to prohibit such items from being taken on an aircraft, and that is backed by the supreme court, the attorney general, and congress. Again I say...if it bothers you so much, take a bus or train.
No, but it is legal for us to prohibit such items from being taken on an aircraft, and that is backed by the supreme court, the attorney general, and congress. Again I say...if it bothers you so much, take a bus or train.
Jan 14, 2003, 10:48 pm
#44
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 227
Where in this section does is say that a knife is "not" a dangerous weapon? See below:
Sec. 46505. - Carrying a weapon or explosive on an aircraft
(a) Definition. -
In this section, ''loaded firearm'' means a starter gun or a weapon designed or converted to expel a projectile through an explosive, that has a cartridge, a detonator, or powder in the chamber, magazine, cylinder, or clip.
(b) General Criminal Penalty. -
An individual shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, if the individual -
(1)
when on, or attempting to get on, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight;
(2)
has placed, attempted to place, or attempted to have placed a loaded firearm on that aircraft in property not accessible to passengers in flight; or
(3)
has on or about the individual, or has placed, attempted to place, or attempted to have placed on that aircraft, an explosive or incendiary device.
Sec. 46505. - Carrying a weapon or explosive on an aircraft
(a) Definition. -
In this section, ''loaded firearm'' means a starter gun or a weapon designed or converted to expel a projectile through an explosive, that has a cartridge, a detonator, or powder in the chamber, magazine, cylinder, or clip.
(b) General Criminal Penalty. -
An individual shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, if the individual -
(1)
when on, or attempting to get on, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight;
(2)
has placed, attempted to place, or attempted to have placed a loaded firearm on that aircraft in property not accessible to passengers in flight; or
(3)
has on or about the individual, or has placed, attempted to place, or attempted to have placed on that aircraft, an explosive or incendiary device.
Jan 14, 2003, 10:49 pm
#45
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
Sorry, we didn't let the foreign terrorists keep us from flying. We certainly are not going to let your agency do so either. Nor are we going to accept the way your agency chooses to conduct its business.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TSA@CAE:
Again I say...if it bothers you so much, take a bus or train.</font>
Again I say...if it bothers you so much, take a bus or train.</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry