Man Forgot Loaded Handgun in His Carry-On, TSA Forgot To Notice
- Thread starter Elizabeth Grunewald
- Start date
Yeah that's the problem. They need to hire people who actually know how to read people and determine if they might try to blow up a plane. Currently, all the security people do is stare at a monitor all day and look for something threatening. They searched my mom's bag because she had girl scout cookies (those mint ones, yum...) in foil wrappers. They must have thought they were pipe bombs or something...ravenshrike said:
So they need to hire people who actually know what they are doing, not people who like to stare at screens (or computer simulated naked people, but don't even get me started on the full body scanners...).
THANK YOU! 'Bout time someone mentioned this. Though I think they have the right idea, just replace gun with something else like a meat cleaver or a kunai (and for the kids, a serrated hunting knife). That would fix the colateral damage problem and no one would get groped unless they want to be.Csae said:
It works the other way too, a thug drawing a gun on an armed citizen (or someone in their party) is a good way for them to get shot. You are jumping forward a whole load of steps here to the conclusion where submission and co-operation is the best option. There are levels of engagement, these sorts of criminals will size of their victims, so many opportunities to detect hostile intent.Csae said:
But assuming you end up at the point you describe, hand over the wallet or refuse, that's not the problem. You need a gun when they don't leave once they have your money...
Street thugs are neither the most competent nor reasonable fellows, and that is where gun ownership is valued not for protecting your wallet but your LIFE AND LIMB. Violent robberies are all too common ESPECIALLY when the victim is completely unarmed, we're talking rape mainly for women and crippling/disfiguring beatings for men. Money is the motivator the the criminals violent instinct takes over.
Why would they do this? Hard to say, but they do. They may start demanding pin codes or account numbers, they are pumped up of drugs or crashing from withdrawal, they aren't thinking straight and are likely paranoid. They may start beating you just they don't like the way you look at them. Remember it takes a certain type of person to rob someone anyway
And of course you are artificially limiting this to simple mugging for your wallet, what about being rushed by your car after someone followed you there from your bank then try to kill you for the envelope of money they think you have on you.
I'm not in favour of guns on board but don't exaggerate the weaknesses of aircraft. I take a keen interest in airplanes and they are surprisingly resilient to damage such as from though they certainly cause a lot of inconveniences. The loss in air-pressure from even a .45 cal hole is manageable, air is constantly sucked into cabin via the engines and vented out to maintain cabin pressure, closing outlet and quickly going down to 15'000 feet is the simple solution.
Hydraulic lines are the life-blood and nervous system of the aircraft, they control and enact force to the wings ailerons. It's easier to land a jet without engine power than without hydraulics, it's like a car with no steering, and no brakes. Hydraulic pressure used to be a problem due to plane designers having such poor imagination they couldn't imagine how the hydraulic system could so catastrophically fail, now all along their length they are fitted with fuses and redundant tubing. So even if a bullet penetrates one tube, the pressure won't all leek out.
BUT, the extent of pressure fuses is not as widespread as many would would like, but when costs and schedules allow. The problem is this is an expensive design feature that won't stop the CAUSE of an disaster, only preventing that cause being fatal. It's what brought down the jet in the Sioux City crash.
I'd ban guns from planes mainly for respect for how you are riding in a multi-million dollar piece of equipment, a plane with a bullet hole MUST land and MUST go though extensive repairs which are expensive in and of themselves but the cost mainly in disruption, taking that plane out of service, detouring so many passengers. My concern is not a "Wild West Shootout" that's crazy, gunfire doesn't just randomly break out otherwise there would be a huge spike in gun deaths at every gun show.
My concern is accidental discharge, it happens when you least expect it. That's all the training sky-marshals need, to control their weapon. Also, sky marshals wanted expanding ammo purely to be on the safe side, a matter of personal liability, plus there are many fringe benefits. Hollow points are a dirty word in some cases, they are actually banned by the Geneva convention, though they are AWESOME... if blowing bigger holes in people is your idea of awesome because hollow points are the ones for that. So they'd certainly fight more for them than against them.
One thing they don't fight for is to have their guns completely taken away and just be left with tazers and batons!
That's called profiling, and to spite being super-effective is just about as hot as a political hot potato you can get. No one wants to touch it.zfactor said:
Israel does it because they have balls of steel and don't give a fuck, but in America you can so easily spin it to be discriminatory because it in fact IS discriminatory by definition (though not in the sense most would use it).
Basically it is really hard to do effective profiling based security without it coming down to targeting Muslims and Arab-looking people who happen to be acting nervous. And there are a load of people of various creeds who will go fucking insane at even the suggestion that is happening in their country. Of course it's not that they will go to jail for being afraid of flying but the procedure is you do send them round for extra screening, interrogation, pile on pressure, perhaps even a missed flight before the security guys are satisfied.
At the end of the day it's easier to do a virtual strip search of every single passenger than try to be "smart" about it.
Guns weren't banned for crime reasons anyway. It was a "feels right" ban.trophykiller said:Ha, too true. I think it's funny how taking away the guns doesn't actually do anything about crime.Treblaine said:>UK bans gunsCannibalRobots said:Never bring a whiskey bottle to a gunfight.shootthebandit said:this doesnt surprise me at all a) its in america b) it in texas
you crazy yanks and your guns, youre all too lazy for a bit of melee
>Brits act like they didn't want guns anyway
>top selling games and movies in UK consist mainly of Americans using guns
Yet 10 years later, another shooting spree with similar numbers killed.
Only in this case more than ever before the failings are with our ineffective and unarmed police while the "rapid" armed response team didn't find him till his body was cold. He took his own life, in his own time, the police may as well not have even been there.
But still the police refuse to get into an "arms race" while gangs are in an arms race WITH EACH OTHER while police and innocent civilians suffer the most. I think British coppers don't want guns because that means the next time there is a shooting they won't have an excuse to run away and hide.
Well, maybe TSA should start doing more searching for danger instead of groping pretty women (or men, if that is their thing).
TSA, why I will never fly to America, it seems ¬.¬
Incompetent perverts, some of them...
TSA, why I will never fly to America, it seems ¬.¬
Incompetent perverts, some of them...
I gotta say, airport security; I'm afraid we will have to revoke your sensible existence card now.
Shame on him. I'd have shot the whole fucking TSA myself with that handgun. I'd like to see them try to "ensure their safety" through the holes in their heads.
Holy crap, you mean the man had a gun and didn't shoot anybody? But... but... but I thought that if you had a gun you HAD to shoot someone. I am confused by this report of responsible gun ownership. It doesn't mesh with the alarmist rhetoric telling me to be afraid of the things and the people who own them.
Three things: one, I can't have been the first to notice that the guy's name sounds Arabic. Does his appearance denote him as one as well, and if so, whaaaat?
Two, I'm actually kind of surprised this story doesn't end with the man serving prison time. Not because he'd deserve it, but just - it seems like something domestic security would do.
Three, I think we can all rest easy in the knowledge that, even if this wasn't an isolated incident, it's still not likely to be an opening for terrorist types. It's a gamble whether security will be hung over enough to actually not notice a dangerous weapon in someone's carry-on. Who would invest all that time and energy into training, conditioning and arming a terrorist, then send him onto a plane with a coin toss as to whether he'd be spotted? (I hope the odds are slightly better than that, but still.) Besides, people with balls of sufficient size to trysmuggling taking an obviously dangerous firearm on board through carry-on must be in short supply.
Two, I'm actually kind of surprised this story doesn't end with the man serving prison time. Not because he'd deserve it, but just - it seems like something domestic security would do.
Three, I think we can all rest easy in the knowledge that, even if this wasn't an isolated incident, it's still not likely to be an opening for terrorist types. It's a gamble whether security will be hung over enough to actually not notice a dangerous weapon in someone's carry-on. Who would invest all that time and energy into training, conditioning and arming a terrorist, then send him onto a plane with a coin toss as to whether he'd be spotted? (I hope the odds are slightly better than that, but still.) Besides, people with balls of sufficient size to try
Security Theatre: The art of creating the illusion of security, without actually doing anything. That's what the TSA is.Broken Orange said:
We can talk about cops and the blue wall later.
