Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

TSA Reminds You Not To Travel With Hand Grenades

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the thanks-for-the-tip dept.

Transportation 378

coondoggie writes "Some of the travel recommendations posted on the Transportation Security Administration's blog seem stupefying obvious. This week's, entitled: 'Leave Your Grenades at Home' seemed like a no brainer, but alas. The TSA wrote about grenades in particular: Year to date, the agency's officers have discovered: 43 grenades in carry-on baggage and 40 grenades in checked baggage."

cancel ×

378 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44824983)

Phase Rifles?

Re:What about (3, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year ago | (#44825151)

Anything below 40 watts should be fine.

WARNING! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825801)

They're trying to get you to let your guard down by being all cutesy. It's much like The TSA's PR shill, "Blogger Bob."
 
Don't let your guard down.

Re:What about (4, Funny)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#44825251)

Lasers not in the company of sharks appear to be OK [avherald.com] .

Re:What about (4, Funny)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a year ago | (#44825657)

Lasers not in the company of sharks appear to be OK [avherald.com] .

Well duh. Sharks need more than 3 ounces of water. And if there's one thing I've learned from traveling, it's that more than 3 ounces of water is dangerous and only a terrorist would try to bring that though an airport checkpoint.

Re: What about (4, Funny)

jxander (2605655) | about a year ago | (#44825865)

Ahhh but water, much like the atom, will completely lose power when split.

That 6 oz. water container is hazardous and must be banned, but if split into 2 3oz bottles, the danger is gone.

Re: What about (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a year ago | (#44825959)

Ahhh but water, much like the atom, will completely lose power when split.

That 6 oz. water container is hazardous and must be banned, but if split into 2 3oz bottles, the danger is gone.

Yeah, but the last time I checked, you cant cut a shark in half and expect it to live. Pus they don't do to well in 6 oz of water either. ;-)

wait...even the Holy ones? (4, Funny)

MoFoQ (584566) | about a year ago | (#44824989)

wait...even the Holy ones?

What about the foam ones? or the ones that are really balloons (but not filled up with anything yet)?

For those of you that don't RTFA... (5, Informative)

OrangeTide (124937) | about a year ago | (#44824991)

a majority of the confiscated grenades are fake, replicas or otherwise inert.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (4, Insightful)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44825085)

A majority, but not all.

Of course, once in the air, circumstances may arise where the only way to tell is to see if it will go off. Not many people want to do that.

Hijacking using bombs, or a threat of a bomb (what's a fake?), was a popular pastime in the 1960s-70s.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (4, Informative)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#44825389)

And yet, it still then didn't add up to a statistically significant enough threat to bother with additional security.

Simple.... all those grenades....0 of them in the hands of terrorists. That should tell you this is a stupid issue.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (4, Interesting)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44825443)

Simple.... all those grenades....0 of them in the hands of terrorists. That should tell you this is a stupid issue.

Because no terrorist would want to bring a grenade on a plane?

If the existing security is finding the grenades they don't need additional security.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (5, Insightful)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#44825525)

Because terrorists are so rare that they are not even worth worrying about, and never were.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#44825569)

They found 83 grenades ... do you know how many grenades they didn't find? When tested, they miss over half of handguns.

PS: you an stick a grenade up your asshole.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (4, Insightful)

wbr1 (2538558) | about a year ago | (#44825547)

This is what armored cockpit doors are for. You can detonate a bomb. You cannot take the plane over and fly it into populated areas or buildings. That is 99% of the airplane security we need, because no matter what, if someone wants to get explosives on a plane, they will.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2)

Deadstick (535032) | about a year ago | (#44825809)

This is what armored cockpit doors are for. You can detonate a bomb. You cannot take the plane over

You can open a pretty sturdy door with the right explosive...

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (5, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#44825935)

Here's your solution, then. Make the sturdy doors ugly.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825691)

With grenades you can remove the fuse body from the shell to render it inert.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825771)

I would describe a secondary explosive without it's fuse as "stable", not "inert".

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

Cyberax (705495) | about a year ago | (#44825817)

It's inert. Even if you put it on fire exactly nothing exciting is going to happen - explosives will simply melt, flow out of the casing and slowly burn.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825107)

a majority of the confiscated grenades are fake, replicas or otherwise inert.

So why have them at all?

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2, Insightful)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#44825405)

Why not have them? Why have bunny slippers? Since when should people have to justify why they want to have their own personal items?

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825907)

When their personal items look like they might blow up that's generally a reason. I'm not necessarily in favor of banning hand grenades that aren't able to go off, but there's more to the issue than you make it sound like. Not MUCH more, but if you're going to argue that the decision is totally stupid then you have to consider it in full first.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825117)

TSA prohibits you from carrying items that merely look dangerous.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (3, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#44825947)

So, no laptops running Windows ME?

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825205)

My wife uses a perfume called Flowerbomb. It comes in a glass container shaped like a grenade. I could imagine this causing an issue at airport scanners.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2)

KillAllNazis (1904010) | about a year ago | (#44825281)

Classy lady.

Flowerbomb - is that AKA Eau d' Paintball? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825353)

I was thinking of getting some of that for my wife...

Re:Flowerbomb - is that AKA Eau d' Paintball? (0, Troll)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#44825575)

I recommend jizz bomb for the special ladies in your life.

Re:Flowerbomb - is that AKA Eau d' Paintball? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825731)

http://www.sephora.com/

Be prepared to pay for it.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44825299)

Glass. You can see through it. Scanner Xrays pass right through it.
Just not a problem.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | about a year ago | (#44825459)

Funnily enough, most of those glass perfume containers are leaded glass that also look opaque on the screen. "If it looks like a threat, treat it like a threat"

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (4, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44825751)

Actually, no.
Leaded glass does not have enough lead to make that much of a difference to xrays of the strength used to scan luggage.
Its not the same high lead content glass you find in radiation shielding items.

Further, nobody wastes leaded glass on perfume bottles any more, which is why all of the
old ones are becoming such collector's items.

Finally, anything you put in or on your body would/should not be stored in leaded glass.
You might drink wine or bourbon from a leaded glass, but you should never store it [wikipedia.org] in such.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (3, Informative)

JWSmythe (446288) | about a year ago | (#44825893)

... and a quick Google search says your wrong.

The presence of lead or other heavy elements was not required for visualization. Fragments as small as 0.5 mm were easily detected if there was no overlying bone. [aappublications.org]

And a somewhat NSFW link with some glass objects that shouldn't be there [x-raytechn...aining.org] .

Density makes a difference. It won't jump out like metal, but it should be visible. here are some examples and notes [x-rayscreener.com]

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44825373)

Is that a clever way of telling us that your wife is "da bomb"?

Re: For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

supersat (639745) | about a year ago | (#44825473)

You're right -- liquids over 100ml are still not permitted through the checkpoint.

Re: For those of you that don't RTFA... (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | about a year ago | (#44825911)

The way checkpoints have been enforced just about everywhere I've gone, it's not the volume of the liquid contained, but the potential volume of the container...

If you have a 1 gallon container with 1oz of liquid remaining, they'll still seize it.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825323)

The others were for fishing.

Except the ones that are not fakes... (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#44825705)

a majority of the confiscated grenades are fake, replicas or otherwise inert.

Except the ones that are not fakes...

Officers at Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) discovered a live 40mm high explosive grenade in a carry-on bag in 2012.

Re:For those of you that don't RTFA... (2)

Dan667 (564390) | about a year ago | (#44825849)

so still no actual security from the tsa. Just security theater for people that are afraid anytime they leave their home and when they are home.

Fuck Network World (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825001)

Link to the fucking TSA blog, not the idiotic morons at Network World: http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/09/tsa-travel-tips-tuesday-leave-your.html [tsa.gov] . Please do not click NW links, and if you must, be sure to have your ad blocker on.

Re:Fuck Network World (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825393)

Who fucking cares? The head cheerleader or number #1 fan in the stands? It's the same fucking chicken shit police state bullshit message.

Complete Failure (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825015)

The TSA:

1) Allows ex convicts to grope your children.
2) Takes and stores full 3d scanned naked images of you using tech for which the cancer-risk has not been adequately assessed.
3) Steals valuables from your luggage.
4) Costs taxpayers a fortune.

and in return:

5) Has foiled exactly zero terrorist plots.
6) Fails to make you safer in any way.

Just sayin'.

Re:Complete Failure (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825043)

The TSA sounds a lot like my exwife!

Badumtish!

Re:Complete Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825415)

badumtish? fabulous.

Re:Complete Failure (1)

consorting-with-daem (13992) | about a year ago | (#44825499)

Oh, wait. Anonymous Coward. You will be here all week!

Re:Complete Failure (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44825543)

She's a Priest?

Re:Complete Failure (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825683)

The TSA sounds a lot like my exwife!

Badumtish!

Badumtish!? That sounds like a terr'st name if I's ever heard one! Strip 'im boys!

Re:Complete Failure (3, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#44825105)

Actually, they might have foiled a terrorist plot without our ever finding out about it, because if or when a system is working as intended, the tendency is only natural to not notice what it is doing. The lack of any evidence to show that they have foiled any terrorist effort, therefore, is logically insufficient basis to presume that they have not actually possibly done so. You may be right, but since stopping such things is what they are supposed to do, there's no way to be certain, if only by their very presence, that they are not having some impact. (Indeed, technically only definitive ineffectiveness can be shown if or when a terrorist attempt that in hindsight should have been detected by the systems in place occurs).

You'll get no argument from me on your other points, however.

Re:Complete Failure (2)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year ago | (#44825201)

Precisely - it's called deterrence, and it's very hard to determine it's effectiveness.

Re: Complete Failure (3, Interesting)

supersat (639745) | about a year ago | (#44825487)

Deterrence is easy to measure if you're wiretapping everyone.

Re:Complete Failure (5, Insightful)

cavreader (1903280) | about a year ago | (#44825229)

Hijackings were pretty rare in the US at the time of 9/11 and the security at the time did make it hard to smuggle in a gun or bomb. Before 9/11 I never heard of case where a gun was successfully smuggled onto a plane in the US. The hijackers on the planes on 9/11 bluffed everyone with threats of a bomb and box cutters for weapons. If this same scenario happened today the first people who stood up and announced they have a bomb and brandish a little knife would most likely get the ever living shit kicked out of them by the passengers. It was passengers who subdued the guy with underwear bomb. The guy who tried to light his shoes on fire to set off an explosion was also subdued by the passengers. Sure some passengers could get injured or even killed in the fight but that's still a whole lot better than killing everyone by crashing the plane.

Re:Complete Failure (1)

Scutter (18425) | about a year ago | (#44825467)

9/11 changed the stakes dramatically. Prior to 9/11, hijackings almost universally meant "fly this plane to Havana and we'll let you all go". As soon as the hijackers upped the ante to "we're gonna plow this thing into the nearest building, killing all of you", they forever ensured that no box cutter would stop the passengers from beating them into a paste.

Re:Complete Failure (4, Insightful)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year ago | (#44825675)

Besides passengers fighting back instead of sitting back and letting a hijacking happen, the only worthwhile security that happened after 9/11 was the locked, reinforced cabin doors. That ensures that the hijackers can't get into the cabin before the passengers take them out. Other than that, pre-9/11 screening (checking for guns, knives, etc) would have been enough. Yes, it let the hijackers through, but the "increased TSA security" has also let through people with weapons.

Re:Complete Failure (4, Insightful)

DaHat (247651) | about a year ago | (#44825587)

It was passengers who subdued the guy with underwear bomb.

Correct... but only AFTER the detonator failed to ignite the explosive material... but instead ignited his pants and resulted in no boom.

The guy who tried to light his shoes on fire to set off an explosion was also subdued by the passengers.

Correct... but only AFTER he was unsuccessful at lighting the fuse.

In both cases it was not the passengers subduing the attackers which prevented the deaths of those onboard... but instead luck that neither device went off.

Re:Complete Failure (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44825689)

That's a good point, the airport security before 9/11 was already good enough to stop an attack. There was no need to increase it significantly.

Re:Complete Failure (5, Funny)

dido (9125) | about a year ago | (#44825333)

Lisa: Dad, what if I were to tell you that this rock keeps away tigers.
Homer: Uh-huh, and how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work. It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: I see.
Lisa: But you don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.

Re:Complete Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825347)

So a lack of evidence does not automatically imply that no plots were foiled. But neither does it imply that any plots were foiled. A theory that explains its own lack of evidence remains a theory that lacks evidence.

The tremendous costs, in terms of dollars, dignity, and abuses, need to be justified by something better than an explanation of why no evidence of success should be expected.

Re:Complete Failure (1)

Dan667 (564390) | about a year ago | (#44825875)

I am saying you have foiled every attempted ufo invasion since 9/11. Keep up the good job.

Re:Complete Failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825401)

Well, let's try a little rigorous thinking:
1) Very few ex cons, or cons, or even regular people, for that matter, are pedophiles. I'd worry much more about ex cons being waiters and taking my credit card information. Of course, a lot of waiters are actors, and I worry about giving THEM my credit cards. In fact, if I had young children, I'd worry a LOT more about my priest, with whom they spend time on a regular basis, than about a possible ex-con with whom they spend exactly 90 seconds.
2) Well, anyone who sees my naked body deserves the nightmares they will have for days afterward. The cancer risk, yeah, that's a problem, but some people won't believe there's no cancer risk with any given thing, no matter how much research. Look at the whole cell-phone brouhaha.
3) Yes. True, and terrible.
4) Don't know about a "fortune", but they certainly spend tax money. I would like to see actual figures on how much per passenger is spent on the TSA.
5) How can you know that? As far as I'm concerned, every gun/real grenade/big knife they take away is a danger removed. If you believe that because nobody starts shouting "Allahu Akbar" or whatever it is we suppose terrorists shout, when the TSA takes away their box-cutters, that they haven't foiled any terrorist plots, then... wait. I've lost track.
6) And how can you know that? I think it probably does make some people feel safer. I guess if by "you" you mean YOU, then I guess you're right.

Re:Complete Failure (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825501)

1. Your priest probably doesn't grope your kids as part of his job. And even so, the fact that an ex-con somewhere else might be worse doesn't make an ex-con at the TSA acceptable. And you can dispute fraudulent credit card charges easily.

2. The onus is on the TSA to demonstrate safety before they start putting people in these machines, which they have not done. And just because you don't mind the government forcing you to pose nude for a camera doesn't mean it is ok to impose this on everyone who actually has a sense of dignity.

3. Indeed! Just like all these other points!

4. "I haven't seen the numbers" is not a counter-argument. Someone (probably me, but am too lazy) should look them up.

5. Based on what has been reported, all the stuff they have removed were in the possession of ordinary Americans who thoughtlessly included it in luggage, and posed no threats. In order to justify the expenses of the TSA, they must show solid evidence of their success. Since that evidence has not been shown, the backwards "well you wouldn't know anyway" argument is weak justification for a very heavy-handed set of policies.

6. Making people "feel" safer is not worth the costs of the TSA. If the level of safety they provide cannot be determined, then the whole program is a dog and pony show. A very expensive one, at that.

Re:Complete Failure (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#44825481)

"Complete failure"? For whom? I mean, somebody making money from this...You all should know by now. The only thing to ponder is, cui bono. That is the most direct way to find who puts these things in place.

And of those grenades... (0)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44825061)

So, TSA, how many of those grenades were actually real grenades as opposed to fake, dud, decoy, joke grenades? Do you still shut down the entire airport "out of abundance of caution" for a novelty cigarette lighter shaped like a grenade?

Re:And of those grenades... (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#44825089)

So, TSA, how many of those grenades were actually real grenades as opposed to fake, dud, decoy, joke grenades? Do you still shut down the entire airport "out of abundance of caution" for a novelty cigarette lighter shaped like a grenade?

The answer is ..... RTFA.

Re:And of those grenades... (3)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44825115)

Just out of curiosity, are you arguing with the "no grenades" policy?

Re:And of those grenades... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825357)

fuck yeah, maybe it's because it's not actually a no grenades policy - it's a no-scary paperweights policy. I like the way America used to be, where real grenades, flares, weapons etc did not make the flight and a paper mache brass knuckles didn't make people shit themselves.

Re:And of those grenades... (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44825529)

No I'm arguing against security theatre. My daughter almost cost us a flight one day because she was wearing a necklace in the shape of a tiny, tiny gun. Because it was "gun shaped" they had to call their supervisor to see if we could be let on the airplane or not. I can imagine having a picture of a gun can also get you in trouble. I was mocking the TSA - I know damned well that even if a grenade isn't real they're going to treat it as if it was, call the bomb squad, shut down that part of the airport, etc. It doesn't matter if you tell them it's a toy or a cigarette lighter.

Re:And of those grenades... (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year ago | (#44825709)

I'm not one to agree with the TSA, but confiscating any grenade, even one that the owner insists is a dud, seems to be a good security policy.

It isn't just grenades that they find (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44825065)

TSA finds average of 4 guns each day at airports, with number continuing to rise since 2007 [nydailynews.com]

If it is all just "security theater," the "patrons" seem a bit over-armed.

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (1, Funny)

Greyfox (87712) | about a year ago | (#44825101)

Like that scene from Airplane, they should just give you a gun if you don't have one when you check in at the gate. That'd make the whole process a lot easier...

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year ago | (#44825169)

I'm shocked it's that low. 4 guns a day nationwide is pretty small. You've got to figure out of the millions pouring through airports daily at least a tiny percentage are bat shit crazy. Maybe not even such a tiny percentage. I remember reading about one guy who freaked out on a flight and his fellow passengers got so frightened that they killed him. This was before 911.

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/story?id=118734&page=1 [go.com]

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825397)

Do those stats include things that are just confiscated representations of guns such as toy guns, water pistols and charm bracelet charms shaped like pistols. (Yes, all of those things have been confiscated by the TSA in the past.) The TSA is just conditioning people to passively submit to the authority of a police state. Don't believe me? Pay attention as the role of the TSA gets expanded to buses, trains and sporting events. Remember I told you so when you find you no longer have the freedom to travel without papers and a great deal of patience as you are harassed by petty tyrants in TSA uniforms.

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825597)

Do those stats include things that are just confiscated representations of guns such as toy guns, water pistols and charm bracelet charms shaped like pistols. (Yes, all of those things have been confiscated by the TSA in the past.) The TSA is just conditioning people to passively submit to the authority of a police state. Don't believe me? Pay attention as the role of the TSA gets expanded to buses, trains and sporting events. Remember I told you so when you find you no longer have the freedom to travel without papers and a great deal of patience as you are harassed by petty tyrants in TSA uniforms.

Or maybe they are conditioning people to not be morons and carry things that are sure to draw attention. None of the items you mentioned are necessary for travel or even entertainment during travel. Leave them home or don't whine when you get hassled. Ordinarily I am in favor of people doing what they want as long as they are not bothering/harming anyone, but when you travel by air be sensible. You know the rules, you know there are people charged with enforcing them who probably don't have discretion in a lot of cases and are going to err on the side of caution in all of them, avoid creating hassle for yourself, for the guards and for fellow passengers by flagrantly disregarding them. It's not a matter of rights in most of these cases, it's a matter of courtesy.

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (1)

mjwx (966435) | about a year ago | (#44825425)

TSA finds average of 4 guns each day at airports, with number continuing to rise since 2007 [nydailynews.com]

If it is all just "security theater," the "patrons" seem a bit over-armed.

As much as I agree with you, the TSA is overkill.

Airport security should be able to detect guns without 3D scanners and "enhanced pat downs". Same with terrorist plots, airport security is the absolute last line of defence, we shouldn't arm it or treat it as the first line.

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825447)

It doesn't really matter _what_ you allow on the plane; it matters _who_ you allow on the plane. From what I've read, most guns in luggage tend to be from military or police types, or people with valid carry permits who forgot that they left the handgun in their duffel bag from the day at the range. In those cases you would probably be _safer_ on the plane if they had their gun with them.

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825605)

From what I've read, most guns in luggage tend to be from military or police types, or people with valid carry permits who forgot that they left the handgun in their duffel bag from the day at the range. In those cases you would probably be _safer_ on the plane if they had their gun with them.

Major Nidal Hassan would probably disagree

Re:It isn't just grenades that they find (2)

_Ludwig (86077) | about a year ago | (#44825717)

Guns which would almost certainly have been found using the pre-9/11 security procedures.

But how... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825093)

how are we going to 9/11 the NSA if they confiscate our toys ?

No grenades were found (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825103)

Year to date, the agency's officers have discovered: 43 grenades in carry-on baggage and 40 grenades in checked baggage.

No they haven't. They've discovered 83 spheres of inert metal made to look like grenades. They are replicas; fakes.

Re:No grenades were found (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825139)

No, some of the grenades were real. RTFA.

In another announcement: (3, Funny)

Hartree (191324) | about a year ago | (#44825141)

The US Postal Service would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone to get your letter bombs in the mail early this year.

Thank You,

Mmmmm how about no. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825155)

I support the idea of giving everyone a grenade when they get on the plane.

Maybe then that bitch will keep her screaming crapbag child at home...

Handgrenades count? (0)

RedHackTea (2779623) | about a year ago | (#44825161)

If I chop off my hand and paint it green and stick a pin in it, does that count as a hand grenade?

Re:Handgrenades count? (2)

linear a (584575) | about a year ago | (#44825345)

Nah, that'd be a hand greenade.

Re:Handgrenades count? (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | about a year ago | (#44825423)

You planning on winning the big race and shaking the presidents hand?

Re:Handgrenades count? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44825505)

I'm not buying Girl-Scout Cookies from you.

Still use Post-It Notes for these things (1)

puddingebola (2036796) | about a year ago | (#44825179)

Reminder... No... Grenades. Thank you TSA.

applicable quotes (1)

hguorbray (967940) | about a year ago | (#44825239)

What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public -Tommy Boy

No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the record for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. H.L Mencken

improperly attributed to him as:

No one ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American Public

-I'm just sayin'

Who... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825355)

Who in the world could ever possibly think it's a good idea to carry a grenade on board of a plane...

Re:Who... (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44825519)

Who in the world could ever possibly think it's a good idea to carry a grenade on board of a plane...

To counter the snakes, of course.

O Really? (1)

sci-fi fantasies (2670099) | about a year ago | (#44825359)

Wow. Who will even bring hand grenades on a plane. P.S My dad says Two people: 1. People who like to have hand grenades around with them. 2. People who want to blow up the plane. LOL. TSA Guy: Sorry sir, come with me please. SFX: KABOOM TSA Guy: AGGGGGG!

Don't fall for it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825371)

They're trying to make you feel some support or at least sympathy for their ruthlessly inefficient fascist system. Instead, ask them how many colostomy bags they've punctured during their sexually invasive searches, year-to-date.

Simplier times (1)

12WTF$ (979066) | about a year ago | (#44825455)

Back last century, returning to Australia from MacWorld Boston ('97 as it was the infamous Jobs' praising MS-IE),
I presented an empty 'pineapple' grenade, for inspection to the 'anti-hijacking' pre boarding security at Los Angeles.
I had unscrewed the fuse out of the body of the grenade and I presented the two pieces saying: "You may not like this..."

But once they saw the grenade was mounted on a small base board with a small plaque that read:
"Customer Service. Please take a number" with a square tag with the number "1" on the pull ring of the pin,
they laughed and waved me through...

Re:Simplier times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825713)

In cases like this, how you approach the situation will have a much greater impact than actual policy. You were open about what it was and presented it in a reasonable manner. A lot of people simply would not do that. They would either completely forget that they're carrying something that could be perceived as a threat, or they would try to conceal it knowing that it may be perceived as a threat, or they would get argumentative. None of those approaches are sound when dealing with people who have to make quick decisions.

why can't connect to Slashdot using fedora 15 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44825623)

also why is the mobile version of website so bad. I mean really bad like intentionally bad. I finally deleted it from my bookmarks it was so bad.

I carried on a mock roadside bomb once (3, Interesting)

shadowofwind (1209890) | about a year ago | (#44825639)

I carried on a mock EFP on a flight to L.A. The TSA didn't even open the bag. I was kind of appalled, because there was a lot of sharp steel in it even though there was no explosive. But then on my return trip they took my tiny little drill bits, because drill bits are forbidden.

Another time I tried to carry on a big knife by accident, but they found it. I would guess most of the confiscated guns are like that. Sam Kinison even had a routine about this.

I think its all bullshit, especially the millimeter wave stuff, its just a big money making scheme for L3 and their corrupt government patrons. If someone wanted to kill a bunch of people at an airport, the best place would be the queue at the security check. If I had my way we would fly unmolested and accept the risk. Locking the cockpit doors solves most of the problem, and most of the rest of it solved by having a population with some sense of honor, willing to fight back instead of just cowering and waiting to die. My wishful thinking isn't going to change the culture though.

So I wonder? (2)

Grand Facade (35180) | about a year ago | (#44825743)

How many grenades they missed?

most of them aren't even real (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about a year ago | (#44825779)

""The majority of these grenades were inert, replica, or novelty items"

Good job with security theater TSA.

You're So Warped But So Beautiful (1)

wrackspurt (3028771) | about a year ago | (#44825811)

'Leave Your Grenades at Home'

It's all so darkly twisted and Kafkaesque. As a non American looking in I can't imagine that in a 100 years some history student reading his text book will ever know how twistedly, wickedly funny and scary and sad it all is.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?