TSA Says Screening Drinks Purchased Inside Airport Terminal Is Nothing New 427
First time accepted submitter lcam writes in with a story about a video that has started a new round of condemnation against the TSA over the testing of drinks. "The video, posted on YouTube on Monday and featured on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams Tuesday night, has already garnered almost 125,000 hits and nearly 900 comments from angry travelers. It shows two TSA officers swabbing bottles of water, a carton of coconut water and a cup of coffee, among other liquids. 'Now remember that this is inside the terminal, well beyond the security check and purchased inside the terminal ... just people waiting to get on the plane,' YouTube user danno02 says in the video's description. 'My wife and son came back from a coffee shop just around the corner, then we were approached. I asked them what they were doing. One of the TSA ladies said that they were checking for explosive chemicals (as we are drinking them).' The TSA insisted Tuesday that its policy of checking liquids beyond the security gate has been in place for five years now. TSA agents will randomly patrol the gates using a test strip and dropper containing a non-toxic solution, it said."
Re:I'll say it again.. (Score:5, Informative)
What is the TSA for anyway? (Score:5, Informative)
I've had a sneaking suspicion that the TSA is a stealth jobs program for the otherwise unemployable. It's not so much the intrusive searches and so on as the STUPIDITY of their measures (how are four small bottles of liquid different from one large bottle?). As a game I stand in line at the checkpoints daydreaming about all the ways I could sneak things through—ideas that I won't share because it appears that terrorists are generally, thank goodness, even dumber than the gatekeepers. Many critics have already dissected their policies, e.g., http://www.schneier.com/ [schneier.com] It's just too easy.
Terrorism is a very serious problem that can get people killed. So is the TSA.
Re:The TSA needs to be stopped (Score:4, Informative)
Re:non-toxic? (Score:5, Informative)
What's the point of a random check if it's announced when passengers can choose not to participate? If I were a bad guy with a fake ID or something bad in my luggage, I'd go home and try again a different day with a different fake ID.
He'd be recorded as a no-show. If someone got ambitious and went through airport video (or a computer program did so), they just might notice that the bad guy left after hearing about the random check.
Having said that, I don't see the point, unless they're trying to catch people who repeatedly break the law, like smugglers. Or to put up a show.
If he has a fake ID, he'll just use a different one the next time.
But being a no-show is not enough to get you on a no-fly or scrutiny list - I've canceled flights a number of times even a short time before departure and have never had any trouble getting back through security the next time I flew. This was both with full-fare unrestricted tickets and restricted discount tickets.
Re:So why can't they swab bottles 3oz (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Explosive (Score:4, Informative)
If the TSA doesn't get you in there, Larry Craig will...
The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. (Score:3, Informative)
Someday, people will come to realize that there was one single change after 9/11 that effectively eliminated the possibility that hijackers could use our planes to fly into targets - they put locks on the cockpit doors.
Everything else is a charade. The TSA was created and is funded specifically to allow politicians to brag that they "created jobs", even if those jobs are completely worthless and nothing more than "security theater". It's a federal work program, nothing more. You might as well named it the "Ditch Digging Administration" and put the same low income, low skill workers in fields digging ditches and filling them back in. At least that would have some tangible benefit and stop causing so many people the nuisance.
In fact, the privacy invasions, delays, and "no fly lists" put in place by the TSA have caused significantly more deaths than happends on 9/11 - because people avoid the airports more and drive... getting into highway accidents.
Re:non-toxic? (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. The TSA now has "VIPR" checkpoints on the highways.
Re:non-toxic? (Score:3, Informative)
I'll add my own security theatre anecdotes :
I wear contacts. On a recent plane trip, I had forgotten about the 24oz bottle of saline solution in my backpack. I saw it as I threw my wallet/watch/etc. into my bag, and was certain they'd make me throw it out. Much to my surprise, it qualified as a medical necessity and was exempt from the 3oz limit. No testing or swabbing, no questions asked. Just an easy walk through with 24oz of mystery fluid in a bottle marked "saline."
But I can do you one better:
A friend of mine is diabetic, and as such he carries needles, insulin, finger-pokey tools, etc. He also carries doctors notes explaining his condition and medical need for this equipment. However he's never been asked to show the documents or prove his condition in any way. TSA sees the needle and vials, sharp stabby equipment, and just lets it on through. How easy would it be to smuggle basically anything through, under the guise of medical necessity?
Re:The TSA needs to be stopped (Score:5, Informative)
Text of the fourth amendment:"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Note it says "people" NOT "citizens".
Re:non-toxic? (Score:5, Informative)
None of those jobs inherently require the employees to violate your rights.