Just found a knife on my plane

Old Mar 21, 07, 11:49 pm
  #76  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 62,268
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post

We all have opinions. They should all be heard and debated.

Where did you get the idea that I was in favor of censorship?
I am happy that I misunderstood.

However, to answer your question of how I got that idea it was from the flow of conversation.

Originally Posted by blueeyes_austin
See Spiff and GU ranting on about "Islamophobes" and "bigots" while employing incredibly deceptive techniques of argumentation. I wonder, why doesn't anyone call them on this?
Originally Posted by law dawg
Its the normal double-standard
Originally Posted by birdstrike
Come now, law dawg...
The fact is -- and I say this as absolutely no fan of the TSA -- is that just about anything can be said about the TSA, be it factual or fanciful, and it will get general TS/S praise, if it is negative.

On the other hand, any favorable statement about the TSA -- again, either factual or fanciful -- will be met with general derision on this forum.

Frankly, the mindset here is so predictable that I could probably write an entire thread myself, starting with a particular topic, and then going on to post exactly what certain other members would respond -- and thus save them the trouble.

Last edited by Dovster; Mar 22, 07 at 12:03 am Reason: typo
Dovster is offline  
Old Mar 21, 07, 11:59 pm
  #77  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,788
Originally Posted by Dovster View Post
Frankly, the mindset here is so predictable that I could probably write an entire thread myself, starting with a particular topic, and then going on to post exactly what certain other members would respond -- and thus save them the trouble.
I think we all could.

Perhaps some minds are changed here, perhaps not. Even though the debate becomes repetitive and even tiresome, what else should we do?

Edit to say I don't see Spiff and GU employing incredibly deceptive techniques of argumentation.

I respect your debating skills. Do you think they are being deceptive? I do not.

Last edited by birdstrike; Mar 22, 07 at 12:14 am
birdstrike is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 1:53 am
  #78  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LAX, PSP
Programs: SPG & CO Plat.
Posts: 3,139
Some slack for the TSA

While I'm sorry to learn the OP has to endure this extra scrutiny, the TSA actions are appropriate.

It is not unheard of that a criminal would get cold feet and seek a means out of his criminal path. The TSA quite rightly needs to determine whether MSP Alert chickened out of some bad act, and whether he remains a threat to try "it" again were his courage to resurface.

While the OP must endure this extra scrutiny, he did the right thing turning it in.
FatManInNYC is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 5:23 am
  #79  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 89,765
Originally Posted by FatManInNYC View Post
While I'm sorry to learn the OP has to endure this extra scrutiny, the TSA actions are appropriate.

It is not unheard of that a criminal would get cold feet and seek a means out of his criminal path. The TSA quite rightly needs to determine whether MSP Alert chickened out of some bad act, and whether he remains a threat to try "it" again were his courage to resurface.

While the OP must endure this extra scrutiny, he did the right thing turning it in.
Most armed criminals getting cold feet in the process of engaging in a violent act personally turn in a prohibited weapon to the authorities just prior to the attack, other than at the point of a gun?

If that's what DHS/TSA is counting on, DHS/TSA is counting on getting lucky.

Personally, I don't want our government wasting resources on such a loser proposition -- and a loser proposition is what security (i.e., not intel and detective work) counting on terrorist cold-feet, in the manner you suggest, is. If the DHS/TSA wants to waste money/time so badly, what's the difference between sending DHS/TSA management for a paid vacation to Las Vegas with a multi-billion dollar amount of chips to waste and what we are getting nowadays?

Last edited by GUWonder; Mar 22, 07 at 9:58 am
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 9:14 am
  #80  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,701
Originally Posted by birdstrike View Post
cestmoi123 seems to think that a knife with a less than 4" blade is somehow not a knife.
Don't know what this is supposed to mean, but I certainly understand that a knife with a 3.5" blade is a knife. That being said, you really have to draw the line somewhere (otherwise people could bring axes fully capable of breaching the secured cockpit door on board), and 4" seems a pretty reasonable compromise (big cooking knives go in checked baggage, the swiss army knife on someone's keychain goes on the plane...
cestmoi123 is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 10:15 am
  #81  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,977
First sub-topic:
The sequence of events surrounding the liquid ban is unclear to those without the need to know, but AIUI it was the Pakistanis who precipitated it by announcing they had arrested one of the alleged conspirators. The British intelligence service(s) had the UK players under covert surveillance and had done so for some time; and wanted to continue. Who made the actual decision to panic err... sorry, react is not exactly clear but it seems not to have been DHS, since Commissar Chertoff was apparently hauled from his bed in the middle of the night to be told what had already been implemented in the UK.

Second sub-topic:
Whether the TSA screening has in fact deterred any attacks is known only to any such putative attackers. I think those who "rant" about the screening theatrics argue that a repeat of a 9/11 style attack is virtually impossible due to a) fortified flight decks and b) likely passenger reaction. Whether terrorists would be willing to settle for a lesser attack consisting solely of mayhem with knives etc., again only they can say. My feeling is that 9/11 and the subway attacks have set the bar higher than that.
Wally Bird is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 10:43 am
  #82  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: YPE
Posts: 420
Originally Posted by cestmoi123 View Post
Don't know what this is supposed to mean, but I certainly understand that a knife with a 3.5" blade is a knife. That being said, you really have to draw the line somewhere (otherwise people could bring axes fully capable of breaching the secured cockpit door on board), and 4" seems a pretty reasonable compromise (big cooking knives go in checked baggage, the swiss army knife on someone's keychain goes on the plane...
I'm not sure that TSA and other security agencies are wrong in their blanket prohibition of knives in carry-ons at this point in time, because the legality of carrying knives varies greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and creating tailor-made regulations to fit each legal territory is simply not viable.

In many jurisdictions, including Canada, it is an offence to carry certain types of knives, such as "butterfly" knvies and spring-loaded knives, both of which may have blades less than 4 inches in length. These are, however, legally sold in some states. Would you trust a border agent to be able to make a proper determination of current law?

It may also be an offence to carry any knife depending on the context in which it is intended to be used. Example: Mr. X, having been recently assaulted, decides to carry a 6" steak knife around with him for "protection", and sticks it in the back of his pants. Mr. X bends over and the blade handle is spotted by the police. Mr. X is then arrested for having a weapon with a purpose "dangerous to the public peace", and is arrested. I see this charge quite a lot in court, as a matter of fact, but it probably does not have a legal analogue in most US jurisdictions. Does this mean that a TSA agent, who spots Mr. X bording a flight to Canada (knife in his pants) from a state with no law against this behaviour, should do nothing? If Mr. X pulls out the knife and prods his seatmate with it after they have landed in Toronto, does that mean that TSA should bear no responsibility in having let this item through?
davidcalgary29 is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 11:36 am
  #83  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 89,765
Originally Posted by davidcalgary29 View Post
I'm not sure that TSA and other security agencies are wrong in their blanket prohibition of knives in carry-ons at this point in time, because the legality of carrying knives varies greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and creating tailor-made regulations to fit each legal territory is simply not viable.
What we have today are rules that vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and rules that are inconsistently enforced -- or at least substantially ineffective -- even in those jurisdictions where knife-relevant rules are in existence.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 11:58 am
  #84  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,788
Originally Posted by davidcalgary29 View Post
In many jurisdictions, including Canada, it is an offence to carry certain types of knives, such as "butterfly" knvies and spring-loaded knives, both of which may have blades less than 4 inches in length. These are, however, legally sold in some states. Would you trust a border agent to be able to make a proper determination of current law?
The TSA isn't chartered to enforce regional laws. Sudafed is prohibited in Japan. Should the TSA dump all medications lest someone carry something that is prohibited somewhere?
birdstrike is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 12:23 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,945
Originally Posted by davidcalgary29 View Post
I'm not sure that TSA and other security agencies are wrong in their blanket prohibition of knives in carry-ons at this point in time, because the legality of carrying knives varies greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and creating tailor-made regulations to fit each legal territory is simply not viable.
So we should take the most restrictive rule in the world and apply it to all of our flights? Can't fly with alcohol, since that is prohibited in many countries. Can't fly with radar detectors, since those are prohibited in certain states. That dog won't hunt IMHO.
ND Sol is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 12:38 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LAX, PSP
Programs: SPG & CO Plat.
Posts: 3,139
Originally Posted by GUWonder View Post
Most armed criminals getting cold feet in the process of engaging in a violent act personally turn in a prohibited weapon to the authorities just prior to the attack, other than at the point of a gun?

If that's what DHS/TSA is counting on, DHS/TSA is counting on getting lucky.

Personally, I don't want our government wasting resources on such a loser proposition -- and a loser proposition is what security (i.e., not intel and detective work) counting on terrorist cold-feet, in the manner you suggest, is. If the DHS/TSA wants to waste money/time so badly, what's the difference between sending DHS/TSA management for a paid vacation to Las Vegas with a multi-billion dollar amount of chips to waste and what we are getting nowadays?
Certainly the DPS is not counting on criminals abandoning their plans, but it is something that happens with suprising frequency. Entire lectures in law school are dedicated to what charges are appropriate for an abandoned/repudiated criminal act or conspiracy.

It doesn't take too much imagination to see how a real criminal (not the OP) would turn in a knife he had planned to use under the ruse of having discovered it. Most criminals are not the calm, super cool intellectuals glamorized in the movies. Most crimes are solved because the crooks do something stupid or crack under the pressure of the act.

So, no, no one is counting on the crook getting cold feet, but when presented with a suspicious set of circumstances the TSA/DHS must investigate the incident fully and to such a degree as to clear those involved.
FatManInNYC is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 1:36 pm
  #87  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 89,765
Originally Posted by FatManInNYC View Post
Certainly the DPS is not counting on criminals abandoning their plans, but it is something that happens with suprising frequency. Entire lectures in law school are dedicated to what charges are appropriate for an abandoned/repudiated criminal act or conspiracy.

It doesn't take too much imagination to see how a real criminal (not the OP) would turn in a knife he had planned to use under the ruse of having discovered it. Most criminals are not the calm, super cool intellectuals glamorized in the movies. Most crimes are solved because the crooks do something stupid or crack under the pressure of the act.

So, no, no one is counting on the crook getting cold feet, but when presented with a suspicious set of circumstances the TSA/DHS must investigate the incident fully and to such a degree as to clear those involved.
Counting on suicidal terrorists to draw immediate attention to themselves, in the manner you are suggesting, minutes after pulling out of a plot/conspiracy is more pipe dream than reality. DHS/TSA "investigating" such a situation is little more than typical government CYA that is not a "must" except for those paranoid about job security.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 1:46 pm
  #88  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Originally Posted by ND Sol View Post
Stay the course and keep the faith.
I don't mean to be picky but isn't "Stay the curse!".

And as noted in a subsequent post "No good deed goes unpunished".

What happened to "if you observe anything suspicious report it to the appropriate authorities."

What this experience appears to be telling you is hide the knife, don't mention a word to anyone, and look the other way, or you will be severely inconvenienced. Your only salvation at this point is that nothing you said was under oath so apparently it has no legal weight, at least as I understand the prevailing ethics in this country.
sailman is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 1:54 pm
  #89  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 89,765
Originally Posted by sailman View Post
Your only salvation at this point is that nothing you said was under oath so apparently it has no legal weight, at least as I understand the prevailing ethics in this country.
I wouldn't necessarily count on the condition of statements not being given under oath to mean there's no problem. If someone gets a whiff of "obstruction of justice", real or imagined in the minds of law enforcement or prosecutors, then all bets are off.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 22, 07, 2:39 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,251
To any of the airmashals who read this(since no one knows who you really are) What you say to do ?
coachrowsey is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: