Remix.run Logo
edm0nd 4 hours ago

Correct. In the US, the TSA is just a government jobs program for the lowly skilled or unskilled. It's all security theater.

TSA Chief Out After Agents Fail 95 Percent of Airport Breach Tests

"In one case, an alarm sounded, but even during a pat-down, the screening officer failed to detect a fake plastic explosive taped to an undercover agent's back. In all, so-called "Red Teams" of Homeland Security agents posing as passengers were able get weapons past TSA agents in 67 out of 70 tests — a 95 percent failure rate, according to agency officials."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-...

fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I find it interesting to contrast this with my experience flying out of China. I was taken to a private room and shown the digital colored X-ray of my bag on which a box had been drawn around an empty lighter, I was asked to remove it myself and hand it over, and I went on my way. All in under 5 minutes, no pat down, no fuss, and no one physically rifled through my belongings. (Granted I was a tourist so that might well not be typical.)

I'm not sure what their success rate is when tested by professionals but the experience definitely left me wondering WTF the deal with the TSA is.

2muchcoffeeman 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Once at a security checkpoint to a museum in Shanghai, they saw my water bottle, and then told me to take it out and drink from it.

wakawaka28 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

A lighter is very different from a weapon. I'm sure they can see everything they need to see with X-rays. Do you think they find a white guy flying out of China to be a likely terrorist? (I'm assuming you are white or asian.)

I've never had a bad experience with TSA but I hate taking off my shoes and all. I really question the value of those security measures.

fc417fc802 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

I haven't had any particularly bad experiences with the TSA either but I have been physically searched a few times. The entire process is definitely slower and more involved. The contrast of that coupled with the published failure statistics just leaves me wondering. I'd rather we got rid of them but if we must keep them I think we could do at least a bit better.

JasonADrury 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I routinely conceal large bottles of liquids on my person while going through airport security. I've probably gone through airport security in various places with a 1.5L bottle of water more than a hundred times now. Haven't been caught once, although of course the US-style scanners could presumably defeat this.

Same with hot sauces, perfume and the occasional bottles of wine. I really don't like to travel with a checked-in luggage, so this is a frequent problem.

Luckily I own lots of Rick Owens clothes with large hidden pockets.

grepfru_it 2 hours ago | parent [-]

A plastic water bottle isn’t triggering a tsa pre check metal detector. I’m totally doing this next trip

kleiba 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I've never done that yet I've never had any trouble finding water past security or even on a plane?!

michaelt 37 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Airport prices in the UK for recreational travel work like so:

Flight from London to Barcelona: £16

Bottle of water past security: £5

Train to airport: £26

Taxi enters drop-off area for 30 seconds: £7

A person who wants to get the advertised flight at the advertised price has to be very careful.

jeffwass 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Even in your own car dropping off your friends or family at a UK airport (at least the London ones) requires paying a £6 fee now. Just to get to the dropoff area, even for 30 seconds as you say.

But hey, at least the luggage carts are free…

kakacik 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Price of water from water fountain (to be found on basically any western airport and most non-western I've ever been to) - 0.

I get your approach, but say where we live (Switzerland) if you have something not tightly around your body like a fleece jacket, you have to take it off and put it through scanner, this is default. Sometimes they still ask me to go down to t-shirt even if its obvious I don't have anything in pockets.

Not worth the hassle for something that is mostly free and probably healthier compared to plastic bottles stored god knows where and how long. I'd imagine if they catch you, you are going for more detailed inspection since its obvious you didn't forget 1kg bottle in clothing you wear by accident.

gizajob 21 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah it’s got out and out criminal at this point. Not sure why we should accept a £6.40 charge to drop someone or collect someone from an airport when that’s the actual function and necessity of using an airport. I got charged £100 at COUNCIL OWNED Manchester airport for picking up a friend who accidentally had put themselves in the drop off zone rather than the collect zone. Just completely vile and disgusting corporatism at every single level.

fc417fc802 2 minutes ago | parent [-]

Are you saying they fined you for picking someone up in the drop off area? If so that's pretty wild. It's all just traffic at the end of the day.

fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

When people say "water" here I have to assume they mean "vodka". Otherwise you can just bring an empty bottle and fill it on the other side. It's the toiletries that pose a problem.

JasonADrury an hour ago | parent [-]

Disappointingly, in my case it's usually just water. I'm walking towards security with my bottle, I can either slip it in my pocket or put it in a bin. Not throwing it away saves a bit of time and quickly becomes the default choice.

londons_explore an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Some airports charge money for water after security.

Others disallow even empty bottles at security screening

fnord123 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Others disallow even empty bottles at security screening

I haven't encountered this. Could you name some?

unclad5968 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> In the US, the TSA is just a government jobs program for the lowly skilled or unskilled. It's all security theater.

This matches my experience. I recently flew out of a small airport that flies 2 fairchild metro 23 turboprop planes up to 9 passengers. There were four TSA agents to check the 5 of us that were flying.

bruce511 3 hours ago | parent [-]

You gotta love the TSA. They serve no real purpose, but its a monster too big to kill, staffed by people who desperately cling to the notion they're doing something important.

They don't stop hijackings (locking the cockpit door does that), they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber), they don't stop weapons (lots of airports outside the US have simple metal detectors for that.)

They do however cost the govt a lot of money, keep a lot of expensive-machine-makers, and in business, improve shampoo sales at destinations, waste a lot of passenger time and so on.

So... what's not to love?

ssl-3 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The grunts working for TSA on the floor at airports aren't desperately clinging for the notion that they're doing something important, or working towards some lofty, noble, and/or altruistic goal.

It's just a job.

They're principally motivated to do this job by the promise of a steady paycheck and decent benefits -- the same motivation that most other people with steady paychecks and decent benefits also have.

dataengineer56 5 minutes ago | parent [-]

In my experience many of them do feel like they're doing something important, and some seem principally motivated to do the job by the promise of being able to bully travellers.

matwood 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> They don't stop hijackings (locking the cockpit door does that)

9/11 also stopped all future hijackings. Up to that point passengers were trained that if they stayed calm they would likely survive. Now? Short of the hijackers getting guns on the plane, passengers will absolutely fight back.

> they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber)

Suicide bombers are probably the main vector that TSA helps avoid even if they miss some items sometimes.

closewith 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber),

I think you should read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_a...

The only reason you believe aircraft bombings aren't being stopped is because you live in a world where rigourous security has stopped all aircraft bombings.

reeredfdfdf 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah. The "security theater" absolutely does play its part in stopping attacks. Without it, airplanes would be an extremely easy target for any nutjob to commit mass murder in. They wouldn't even necessarily need a bomb, anything that can cause a big enough fire mid-flight could be potentially catastrophic. Over past few decades many airliners have crashed because out of control fire in the cabin / cargo hold. I really don't want it to be easy for any random person to cause such fire.

fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Without it, airplanes would be an extremely easy target for any nutjob to commit mass murder in.

They still are, but I'm not comfortable spelling out details. The 95% TSA failure rate should lead you to this conclusion naturally.

> They wouldn't even necessarily need a bomb, anything that can cause a big enough fire mid-flight could be potentially catastrophic.

People have plenty of such things with them as it currently stands. Plenty more can be trivially brought on board in a checked bag or even pocket. But again I'm not going to spell it out.

> I really don't want it to be easy for any random person to cause such fire.

Well that's unfortunate because it already is. I think the primary things protecting passengers are the cost of entry (the true nutjobs don't tend to be doing so well financially) and the passengers themselves. Regarding the latter, the shoe bomber was subdued by his fellow passengers.

sethammons 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Did you drop a sarcasm tag? Anyone can make a fire on a plane as they allow lighters on a plane, and batteries, and any number of flammable objects. None of that is facing any scrutiny nor stopping crazy people from being crazy.

wakawaka28 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

I've heard that cell phones often catch fire on planes, and the crews know how to deal with that. I guess they have to because the odds of one going up are pretty good across so many flights.

wakawaka28 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Most would-be attackers are not suicidal, I suppose. You would have to be in order to start a fire on a plane that you are on.

VBprogrammer an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Trains are a much easier target in most countries. Generally only the high-speed / cross border ones have any security at all. Until maybe 10 years ago you didn't even really need a ticket to get access to one (now ticket barriers are common).

thaumasiotes 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There's a pretty strong trend in that timeline of two types of "bombings":

(1) Bombings in which the bomb is supplied by someone who isn't flying on the plane;

(2) Failed hijackings in which there was no intent to bomb the plane, but a bomb accidentally went off.

throwaway290 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> they don't stop weapons (lots of airports outside the US have simple metal detectors for that.)

There are 3D printed guns.

fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Those tend to have extremely limited usefulness. Good enough to assassinate a single person at point blank range before they catastrophically fail but (unless something has changed) not much else. Plastic just isn't cut out for the job.

koshergweilo 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Don't you still need metal bullets for the 3d printed gun?

lostlogin 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> the US, the TSA is just a government jobs program for the lowly skilled or unskilled.

I thought that was the US military?

askl an hour ago | parent [-]

I thought that was the US police force?

dboreham 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

TSA is much more skilled than the security people employed by the airlines that proceeded them.

aiisjustanif 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

While still theatre to a degree, that was 11 years ago.

kyralis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Do you have evidence that anything has changed?