Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TSA: Fail

gmancasefile.blogspot.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 121 posts

Re: TSA: Fail

#51

Post by pyre »

richardlblair wrote: post #36

True Story: A friend of mine was traveling through various airports in the states. He had accidentally left his pencil bag in his back pack which had a pair of scissors in it. The scissors were over the length allowed on a plaine (Something like 4" is considered safe.) He went through 2 security checks in the states, and boarded planes with these scissors in his back pack. It wasn't until he went through a simple, sm…

At the same time, a couple of years ago they gave me a HUGE hassle over a fucking snow globe. Even going so far as telling me that I had to ship it because it was banned from checked luggage.

Re: TSA: Fail

#52

Post by esun »

willyt wrote: post #46
twoodfin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How easy would it be to board in, say, Mexico or Canada, and hijack the flight to the US? Arguably harder than it would have been before 9/11, as the U.S. has insisted on security standards for flights destined for American airports. That's why you frequently have to go through an additional gate security check at a European airport when flying to the U.S.

Well just hijack a regional Canadian/Mexican/Whatever flight then.

Take off, eh!

Re: TSA: Fail

#53

Post by swombat »

twoodfin wrote: post #43
jasonkolb wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As he said in the article, if they HAD stopped someone, that someone would have been charged with a crime. Where are the charges?

That's a fairly naive argument. My local bank discourages potential robbers with armed guards, alarms, and a locked vault. Just because they've never charged anyone with bank robbery doesn't mean those measures didn't prevent potential robbers from deciding to become actual robbers. It's really not any better than the argument that of course the TSA keeps away terrorists and tigers because there haven't been any hija…

Let me tell you about this new product of mine. It's called Rhinoceros powder, and it does - you guessed it! It scares away Rhinos. As long as you spread Rhino powder everywhere, you will not be attacked by a Rhino. It works particularly well in urban areas.

It clearly works, too! I've been using it for decades, as have many of my customers, and wouldn't you know it! None of them have ever been attacked by a Rhino.

$60b a pack.

Re: TSA: Fail

#54

Post by nagrom »

ot wrote: post #23

I don't really buy the argument "TSA has never [...] foiled a terrorist plot or stopped an attack on an airliner.": it could be argued that the TSA measures act as an effective deterrent. A stronger argument could be to show that in none of the countries that do not adopt TSA-like measures there have been any terrorist attempts, let alone successful. How easy would it be to board in, say, Mexico or Canada, and hijack…

There are body scanners in Europe. I went through one at Schiphol on the way to Washington last week. And I didn't see any sign there to tell me that I could opt for a pat-down, whereas there are screens to tell you that in Washington on the way back.

Re: TSA: Fail

#55

Post by jonhohle »

joelmichael wrote: post #31

Does he really think potential terrorists or criminals are going to hijack a plane using toothbrushes or popsicle sticks? The purpose of the TSA is to screen all passengers for real threats like guns, blades, and most of all, bombs. He says there was no outcry over the backscatters. That's just out of touch; it was all over the Internet and even major news media back around November of 2010. Liberals and conservative…

  > have you ever seen one?
  > 
  > Seems to me that the TSA has changed their backscatter
  > approach since then. Instead of showing the full images 
  > to security personnel it will do some computational 
  > analysis of the images and then represent any anomalies 
  > on a simple drawing of a human. The people going through 
  > the machine will see the same images the TSA will.
Perhaps you don't travel often, but I have not been to an airport in the past 1½ years which didn't have either backscatter or millimeter wave scanners used as primary screening methods for the majority of passengers - PHX, SEA, FLW, MKE, AUS, MCI, SFO - those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Also, the generic image is only used with the millimeter wave scanners (the clear phone booth looking scanners). The back scatter machines still produce a grayscale nude image.

Every plane is already equipped with hundreds of pounds of explosives. You wouldn't get anywhere without them. The statistical probability of that or any other explosive causing you harm - even in the event that harm is intended - approaches zero. It is far more likely you'll be the victim of assault, auto accident, or of unknown causes than have any harm come to you on or by an airplane and this has always been the case. Statistically, there is absolutely no personal or public safety issue with eliminating intrusive, unconstitutional searches in order to board planes.

Re: TSA: Fail

#56

Post by richardlblair »

CurtMonash wrote: post #40
richardlblair wrote: post #36

True Story: A friend of mine was traveling through various airports in the states. He had accidentally left his pencil bag in his back pack which had a pair of scissors in it. The scissors were over the length allowed on a plaine (Something like 4" is considered safe.) He went through 2 security checks in the states, and boarded planes with these scissors in his back pack. It wasn't until he went through a simple, sm…

I saw exactly the same thing happen on Grand Cayman. At the end of the summer, Cayman Islands security found a pair of scissors in a girl's backpack that she'd evidently been traveling with all summer.

It proves that technology doesn't solve these problems. Diligent employees who do their jobs solve these problems.

My buddy was told that there was a faint line on the xray machine and they wanted to check it out. He didn't even know he had those scissors.

Re: TSA: Fail

#57

Post by DanielBMarkham »

As this terrific article says in many different ways: the TSA is a fundamentally flawed institution. It's an example of something that anybody who has spent too much on consultants will recognize: if you have money, there are people who will gladly say they will solve a problem, even if the problem doesn't make sense and there is no solution. It's like that old demotivator image says about consulting "if you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem" (http://www.despair.com/consulting.html)

Don't get me wrong, the agency can be full of the most wonderful and talented dedicated intelligent people imaginable. I kind of doubt it, but it doesn't make a difference. If the paradigm of the agency is seriously broken, it'll never do anything but prolong the problem. If anything, it'll make the problem of terrorism worse (for many reasons too involved to go into here.)

After 9-11 we overreacted and created a monster. We've created a system where the general public is the "enemy". Is the system so broken that even after this is obvious to 90% of the public we still can't get rid of the TSA?

I know when I go on like this about the TSA that I sound like somebody running around with their hair on fire, but dammit, out of the dozen or so major intrusions on my privacy and life by the security state and corporate system over the last 20 years, the TSA is like a poster child for what's went wrong. Good intentions, a real (but very small) threat, bipartisan support, a mission to support air travel safety (something everybody is for). The problem is although it's great at getting votes, it's just not worth the trade-off. And it's such a political football that nobody can touch it. We're giving up too much for way too little in return. And it looks from here like the change is going to be permanent, no matter what we say or do about it.

Re: TSA: Fail

#58

Post by [deleted] »

verelo wrote: post #9

As someone who travels regularly and is not an American, I've had nothing but frustrations generated by the "TSA". Initially it caused me to unfairly assume all Americans are like TSA agents (i know this isn't true, but i guess its just my human bias). A few things that frustrate me: - They are not friendly, have a real attitude problem and treat you as if you are guilty before proven innocent. You are the face of th…

[deleted]

Re: TSA: Fail

#59

Post by jbooth »

jbooth wrote: post #26
tptacek wrote: post #11

It's funny to try to predict what's going to spark the inevitable huge flame war on a thread like this, given that there isn't a soul on HN that thinks the TSA is a good thing. (I didn't flag this article; it's pretty great.)

DON'T YOU DARE SAY THAT ABOUT RON PAUL

So it turns out that even though the only display up to -4, it keeps going down from there on the karma score. Good to know.

Re: TSA: Fail

#60

Post by smsm42 »

_ouxp wrote: post #18
verelo wrote: post #9

As someone who travels regularly and is not an American, I've had nothing but frustrations generated by the "TSA". Initially it caused me to unfairly assume all Americans are like TSA agents (i know this isn't true, but i guess its just my human bias). A few things that frustrate me: - They are not friendly, have a real attitude problem and treat you as if you are guilty before proven innocent. You are the face of th…

There are actually two groups you don't like: the ones who greet you when you enter the USA are Customs & Border Protection agents. They have a lot of power. The TSA employees are the folks in blue shirts who screen you &/ frisk you once you're inside the US & trying to fly. As an always-clean-shaven-when-flying US citizen, I have never had the displeasure of being treated poorly by CBP, though I know (and regret) it…

I am not a citizen, but I crossed into the US many times, and never had any trouble with CBP. But I know they do have a lot of power and I can totally believe some of them can't deal with it, especially when suitably provoked or think they are. Unfortunately it is very hard to estimate the extent of the problem based on third-party anecdotal evidence.
Post reply on HN