the point is that they are ineffective (don't find guns) and just inconvenient security theater (banning nail clippers).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922045)

if it was a ridiculous process that made you throw out water bottles and nail clippers *BUT* they did an excellent job finding weapons people would be much more tolerant. it's the fact that it's both ridiculous AND ineffective that makes it theatre.

if it was effective it wouldn't be theatre -- it would be something that works with a few overzealous policies.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922170)

you think if you take an unassembled gun and put it in a carry on filled with computer parts and shit they're going to to figure it out?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922261)

https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2024/08/02/pennsylvania-man-arrested-after-tsa-officers-intercept-loaded-gun

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922176)

i'm not saying they NEVER find ANYTHING (how would they find the nail clippers then?) the fail MOST of their OWN AUDITS. yes, they do catch retards forget they put their gun in their carry on rather than their checked luggage. a motivated hijacker is not putting a gun in his carry on to be screened by the machine, you absolutely fucking dummy.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922204)

a metal detector is going to weed out most people with guns and shit. everything else is not going to be detected by darnell and shaniqua processing thousands of cumskins. making grandma take off her shoes and throw away her water bottle isn't doing anything. it's an invasion of privacy and convenience that isn't justified by the increase in security, which is almost nil.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921525)

i don't think there is anyone being deterred from hijacking a plane because of the 0.1% chance darnell will discover their hidden knife.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921563)

Terrorists have largely moved on from planes to hit softer targets.

it also stops drunks and violent people from acting stupidly on the plane.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921599)

hijackings have gone down because it's inconceivable that passengers and crew would comply with a hijacker post-9/11. not because people are scared of trying to smuggle weapons on a plane. again, it would be trivially easy to smuggle the same shit the 9/11 dudes have. i've done it accidentally.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921619)

You don’t need to take control of the plane to destroy it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921639)

my argument is that because the TSA is ineffective and it's easy to sneak weapons onto a plane that the deterrent effect from them is very low. and that the reason we have seen fewer hijackings post 9/11 is because fewer people are willing to hijack a plane when it's likely the passengers will mob them.

if you disagree that's fine. this is all conjecture. neither one of us can know for certain without being able to read the minds of people that would have hijacked a plane in a pre 9/11 world.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921667)

Next time i travel i have my kids with me so i go to global entry and i'm like "Hi do i go here with our kids i'm not sure if they have global entry"

Guy acts like i'm the dumbest person on the planet and threatens to kick me out of global entry for life. I apologize and said i thought it was the same as TSA Precheck where young kids follow the parent.

"Does this look like TSA to you?" he responds.

I wanted to be like, hey ding dong, you're under the same agency and you sell and market Precheck and Global Entry as a fucking package.

Instead I just politely move through and apologize profusely. And then at the end he goes, "Btw starting in October your kids will just follow you in this line"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922047)

and don’t even get me started on the no liquids thing.. a multi billion dollar handout to drink companies and airport vendors

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921800)

what about other liquids that we might enjoy? no dice?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921887)

it’s summer and I just flew 8000 miles in shorts and flip flops

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922150)

also these things are 100% possible with whites only

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921553)

That same trick won't work twice, if musbros try to take over a plane they'll get zerg swarmed by bobby birdshit. The correct answer after 9/11 was to do nothing except tell the passengers in the event of a hijacking to kill the musbros. Instead we spent 20 years implementing Real ID which has never done a god damn thing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921572)

there were plenty of american commercial flights hijacked by passengers before 9/11. there have been none since. the one hijacking since 9/11 was conducted by an off-duty pilot in the jump seat.

no one expected the 9/11 guys to kamikaze. if they did they would have rushed them like flight 93. anyone is going to zerg rush someone if the alternative is certain death. 9/11 only worked because something like that had never been done before. it's inconceivable it'll happen again.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921604)

Besides 9/11, the most serious hijacking was FedEx 705, which, in 1994, was almost successfully hijacked. Thankfully, the duty crew changed moments before, so the hijacker had to fight two military guys. He barely lost, but he lost.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921624)

skyking one didn't involve a passenger (hijacker was ground crew) and the plane was empty, so not really relevant to the TSA discussion or how passengers on a plane would react to a hijacker post 9/11.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921643)

if you have a homogenous country you don't need draconian spying laws

if you have a country like US/canada with tens of millions of mud creatures with weird views and beliefs you need draconian spying laws

its not hard

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921607)

get fucked.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47934727)

i also agree that if tsa implemented common technology and procedures across all domestic airports, it would be a far more streamlined and efficient system

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921821)

Meanwhile faulty maintenance is pwning Delta and Southwest, but I don't c u calling those people "unqualified," faggot.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921846)

you seem to think this is some kind of argument.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47921879)

if TSA screening worked they wouldn't let you do that.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922091)

Exterminating all Muslims would also reduce the world population from 8 to 6 billion people, a good thing when this group is just lethal social and political cancer anyway.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922074)

he said "signing up" meaning that someone that attempts to hijack a plane knows that the will die if successful.

this is like someone saying "a suicide bomber is signing up to die" and you piped up with "not if police catch him first!"

GOD YOU ARE SO FUCKING DUMB!!!!!!!!!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922402)

Historic note: until January, 1973 there was no carry on bag screening at all. When I was in college and afterward for several years you didn't need an ID and nothing was checked. On shuttle flights you just walked on and they took your money once the flight took off.

Behavior changed.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922270)

lmao what? Civilians being targeted is as old as warfare itself, up to and including WW2. Part of the reason Romans loved war so much was so they could abduct the women and children into slavery and prostitution and they were hardly alone. The idea that you SHOULDN'T target civilians was made up after WW2 and nobody really follows it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922759)

Since I was flying all the time, I forgot to leave my knife at home one time and still had it in my pocket. Instead of just outright surrendering it, I decided to try to sneak it in. I threw it in one of the bins with my keys, wallet, phone, belt, shoes, sunglasses, etc. I got through security no problem. They didn't say a word and I was home free with my knife.

I had to fly back and did the same thing and it worked.

I thought, "wow, that's odd. I wonder how many times I could get away with this."

The next week I had to fly out again and I intentionally brought a knife with me, albeit a different one. It was a beater knife, Ontario Knife Co Rat 2 knife that was beat to hell. I'd had it for like 15+ years. Anyway, same thing. Threw it into the bin/tub thing with all my other stuff. Sure as shit, I got through security no problem.

Anyway, I did the a total of 16 times without the knife getting confiscated. On the last try, I put the knife into my carry on bag. When the small suitcase went through security, it was immediately flagged and the went through the bag and found it and confiscated it.

My running theory is that you can sneak a knife or whatever in if you want if you throw it into one of the bins that your throwing your other stuff in, like phone, spare change, wallet, keys, etc. It's not 100% gonna work every time despite my success rate, but your odds are good. I think the X-ray security operators are mostly scrutinizing bags and suitcases that go through security. They just assume that 99% of people throwing stuff into the bins and tubs are your standard phone, wallet,.keys, etc. and consequently don't even bother really looking at that stuff in the scan machine things.

I should also note that this worked for an international flight as well, there and back.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568751&forum_id=2...id.#47922704)