I did my own test and they found my tube of toothpaste every time so in case you were worried about a member of ISIS squirting toothpaste at you, you can put your mind at ease.

B737900ER wrote:

Maybe they should have used a 5oz bottle of water for testing instead of fake guns and knives. Then the success rate would have been 90%

Keeping us safe. One liquid at a time.

LOL I was going to say the same thing. They've caught me almost every time with my > 100 mL bottle of liquid, whenever I've forgotten to drink it pre-security. What was even more ludicrous the last time was the contracted TSA dude wouldn't even let me drink the grape juice I had, he just did the "secure" thing and tossed the unopened bottle in the garbage...also the really environmentally responsible thing to do. Next time I'll load my daughter's water pistol with fruit punch in case I forget to consume my drink before going through 'security'...that ought to do the trick.

peterinlisbon wrote:

I did my own test and they found my tube of toothpaste every time so in case you were worried about a member of ISIS squirting toothpaste at you, you can put your mind at ease.

...or threatening you with fresh breath.

Is the TSA's slogan "Illusions of security"?

It seems to me that one thing is forgotten. The security tests are probably carried out by very experienced TSA personnel, who know exactly how the screening agents are trained, and the capabilities of the detection equipment.

It is their job to figure out ways to attempt to defeat the system, and they get at least brownie points when they get something through. Hopefully this leads to improvements in the system. Just like the military do exercises pitting one team against another.

If on the other hand, these are regular tests, using methods that are known and should be detected, it is a different matter, but some of the postings above indicate that they are quite good at detecting objects that are put there accidentally with no special precautions. That has also been my experience !

From Politico.com: "Even before the results of the new investigation were made public, TSA had ordered new procedures that will require travelers to remove any electronics larger than a cellphone from their carry-on bags and place them in a separate bin for scanning. [TSA Administrator] Pekoske said TSA is partially relying on these changes to help shore up gaps revealed by the most recent audit."

Additionally, "The Transportation Security Administration has bad news for tens of millions of Thanksgiving holiday travelers: Lines at airports may be even longer than usual as the agency tries once again to plug security holes in its baggage screening."

It's my experience that the TSA staff at the large airports is too harried to find much of anything, but watch out for airports with only a couple flights per hour. Those TSA stations are pretty eagle-eyed because they have so much time on their hands. Depending on the part of the country they are in, they can also see their job as very patriotic. That said, I haven't taken out toiletries from my bag in over 8 years, and only been questioned about it once.

ltbewr wrote:

It would be great to improve technology but we must recognize the reality of the humans involved. How many of us would be able to spot counterbanned objects looking at TV screens all day?

*raises hand*
I can read X-rays and I had very little former training. And don't give me: "but you're a doctor." X-ray techs can also read X-rays.

It's amazing what people can be taught to do with a little training.

This "test" like the one reported in Forbes magazine a couple years back, was conducted after the testers were educated in just how to get around the software and protocols ahead of time, far from unbiased. How fair a test is that? Still it makes our anti TSA members gleeful.

77H wrote:

Right... because having trigger happy American police officers, retired or otherwise is a great way to de-stress travelers. Talk about power hungry.

Respectfully disagree. I know a bunch of retired cops and they are the opposite - they've been around long enough to be smart and reasonable. However, you'll never get them to work the TSA line - retired cops typically go for manager and consultant roles (security managers for hospitals, universities, etc) to cash in their experience and bulk up their retirement.

NYPECO wrote:

Having the TSA there in the first place discourages people from trying to bring weapons onboard, but they need to be more effective in finding weapons during screening tests. So instead of telling the public how easy it is to get past security measures before fixing these issues, they should keep quiet about it while coming up with a solution. It's better to have people assuming the TSA might be effective than confirming that it isn't. The public can't help the TSA fix any issues.

Respectfully disagree here too. Often the light of public scrutiny is required to mend problems in government. As a veteran of government jobs and the spouse of a previously elected official, I can tell you that the government is prone to sitting on problems and often times requires a breaking headline in the news to spur a sense of urgency about identifying and solving problems. Some departments can take care of business better than others, but at some point all of them need a nudge.

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

falstaff wrote:

KLASM83 wrote:

Cool, now I have another reason at scoffing for taking all my large, bulky electronics out my bags for no reason!

I heard a story in CBS radio, in Detroit, the other day and the the TSA rep was saying that you have to take them out of the bag so they could be seen better. That didn't make any sense to me.

I was surprised in Schipol last month when they told me to put all the items including laptop and liquids back in the cabin baggage on the scanner belt!

Apparently, new equipment means it all gets identified without all the hassle we've grown so wonderfully accustomed to.

Schiphol annoys me for their inconsistency. One day you get bawled at for removing your cables and camera etc., the next you get into trouble for not doing it. Last week I asked when putting my stuff into the tray what I should do and was told to take them out. Once through the scanner I was moaned at for do into so! Sometimes you just can't win!

The current and previous TSA chiefs were both lifetime military officers. How can anyone expect a change? Hire someone whose personality and career were not built on following orders and maintaining status quo. Appointment to a position like this should not be treated as a reward for loyalty.

Why not hire an ex head of Israeli airport security? They seem to have things figured out.

lat41 wrote:

This "test" like the one reported in Forbes magazine a couple years back, was conducted after the testers were educated in just how to get around the software and protocols ahead of time, far from unbiased. How fair a test is that? Still it makes our anti TSA members gleeful.

Those checks are not to avoid John Smith to take toothpaste to the cabin. Are to avoid dangerous situations.

Sounds quite fair. Someone trying to circumvent the security checks will probably study and test how those checks are done. Plenty of people often forget that terrorists can be insane, but they are not usually stupids (or their bosses are not).

While I agree the TSA does not do a better job than the security that was in place before 9/11. Lets face it the previous security had no Hijacking committed against it in over 30 years says a lot. While they were under paid and for the most part just as ineffective as the current TSA the results were the same up until 9/11. If they want effective security number one every TSA agent should have at the very least a BS in psychology to be able to pick out the mannerisms of a suspected terrorist to be able to do on the spot profiling of any suspicious individual that comes past therm. I think the correct plan of action after 9?11 should have been to keep the same security system in place but police it more often with stringent regulations by agents that regularly visit airports to monitor the security level in the long run that would have given the same result. What are the qualifications to be a TSA agent. Somebody got rich selling a lot of over price ineffective xray machines. Dogs woulsd also be a great asset at the check points and I believe when trained properly would be more effective than the current system that is in place. But then what if I told you the power brokers of the world don't want effective security. In all fairness to the TSA due to the bag fees people are bringing way more crap through security than before thus complicating their job with all the extra items to check and process.

RobertPhoenix wrote:

It seems to me that one thing is forgotten. The security tests are probably carried out by very experienced TSA personnel, who know exactly how the screening agents are trained, and the capabilities of the detection equipment.

I can't help but wonder "so what?" - I mean, they know all of them, but that doesn't mean that the agents themselves shouldn't be prepared for any and all possibilities.

Dominion301 wrote:

LOL I was going to say the same thing. They've caught me almost every time with my > 100 mL bottle of liquid, whenever I've forgotten to drink it pre-security.

One time when I was going through TSA security, the guy in front of me had a big bottle of water clearly visible in the outside, mesh pocket of his backpack. No one batted an eye when it went through the x-ray machine. When I pointed it out to the TSA screener while the guy was still gathering up his things, she just shrugged her shoulders and said, "I suppose we should have caught it." No one from TSA made any attempt whatsoever to confiscate the water even though the backpack was within arm's reach.

Another time, the TSA screener insisted that I had to throw my brand new, prescription Albuterol inhaler for my asthma in the trash, because it was an aerosol. I told him that it was exempt, because it was a prescription medication. I said I just got it from the pharmacy and paid a big price for it. He didn't want to back down until a supervisor got involved.

I have actually been told by a TSA manager that TSA officers are allowed to make up their own rules. Despite what it says on TSA.gov about acceptable identification, the individual screeners can decide what they will and won't accept according to that manager.

Another inconsistency is what to do with shoes. At some airports, the screeners get mad and have reprimanded me for putting my shoes in a bin to go through the x-ray machine. At other airports, they've gotten mad and reprimanded me for not putting them in a bin. How can one follow the rules, when the rules are up to the whim of the individual TSA screeners? I'm not clairvoyant!

HHScot wrote:

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

falstaff wrote:

I heard a story in CBS radio, in Detroit, the other day and the the TSA rep was saying that you have to take them out of the bag so they could be seen better. That didn't make any sense to me.

I was surprised in Schipol last month when they told me to put all the items including laptop and liquids back in the cabin baggage on the scanner belt!

Apparently, new equipment means it all gets identified without all the hassle we've grown so wonderfully accustomed to.

Schiphol annoys me for their inconsistency. One day you get bawled at for removing your cables and camera etc., the next you get into trouble for not doing it. Last week I asked when putting my stuff into the tray what I should do and was told to take them out. Once through the scanner I was moaned at for do into so! Sometimes you just can't win!

Aww crap. I was hoping I'd seen the signal that the security dance (where you start taking off your belt and pulling your laptop out of its bag all while holding your watch in your teeth, your silly plastic bag of deodorant and toothpaste under your armpit and dragging your roll-aboard behind you with your remaining little finger) was finally passé.

From what you describe, it could be that the person you asked didn't get the memo yet - and we should now be able to dump on tray and walk on through.

I can only hope...

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

From what you describe, it could be that the person you asked didn't get the memo yet - and we should now be able to dump on tray and walk on through.

I have seen that twice last year, CDG and LTN. Both when a massive wave of passengers was close to get stuck in the filter missing dozens of flights.

"We need to sort this mess out. Put everything in the belt, we can scan it anyway" (literal quote)

KRIC777 wrote:

enilria wrote:

IMHO
#1: People need to realize you can't create a world where people are 100% safe.
#2: Just make sure the terrorists can't get into the cockpit. That's the most important item.
Beyond that, it's all mostly a waste of time and with plastic guns it will become a bigger and bigger waste of time.

Totally agree. However, the idea (of fact) that something is ineffective and a waste of time has never fazed the government in the past. All the delay and inconvenience this travesty causes the flying public, and it fails to do its job 80% of the time? It's borderline criminal.

Except you then encounter the Bart Simpson Paradox, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. The moment someone gets something through and an event occurs you have the overwhelming bulk of the people demanding heads roll and answers; why did that person not show up on a terrorist watch list, why didn't TSA catch that device hidden inside something ordinary, why wasn't there full body cavity searches of naked people publicly displayed... I suppose it all falls back to the TSA when they do things right, the flying public won't be sure they've done anything at all.

PS: Still not a fan of the security theater, but if this goes public sector again, it's going to be just as bad if not worse. The standards will be lower, the pay will be lower all in the name of maximizing marginal profits at best of whatever security company they get to do this. TSA is paying about 14.50 an hour at IAD right no; if that gets subbed out to n outfit like US Security Associates, Securitas or G4s, you're looking at guys who washed/passed over for out of the policy academy, college kid wannabes, and retirees, working for $8.oo /hr. You think power trips are bad now...

Airport security is not perfect.

I think that having Israeli airport security at North American airports would be bad. Imagine an airport like LAX having it. Every car driving to the airport would be slowed down because of questioning. Passenger questioning would also cause major line ups. It would make LAX worse off than it is already. Even airports like YYZ, JFK, and SFO would be negatively impacted by it because it would slow down cars and passengers unnecessarily.

Blimpie wrote:

KRIC777 wrote:

enilria wrote:

IMHO
#1: People need to realize you can't create a world where people are 100% safe.
#2: Just make sure the terrorists can't get into the cockpit. That's the most important item.
Beyond that, it's all mostly a waste of time and with plastic guns it will become a bigger and bigger waste of time.

Totally agree. However, the idea (of fact) that something is ineffective and a waste of time has never fazed the government in the past. All the delay and inconvenience this travesty causes the flying public, and it fails to do its job 80% of the time? It's borderline criminal.

Except you then encounter the Bart Simpson Paradox, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. The moment someone gets something through and an event occurs you have the overwhelming bulk of the people demanding heads roll and answers; why did that person not show up on a terrorist watch list, why didn't TSA catch that device hidden inside something ordinary, why wasn't there full body cavity searches of naked people publicly displayed... I suppose it all falls back to the TSA when they do things right, the flying public won't be sure they've done anything at all.

PS: Still not a fan of the security theater, but if this goes public sector again, it's going to be just as bad if not worse. The standards will be lower, the pay will be lower all in the name of maximizing marginal profits at best of whatever security company they get to do this. TSA is paying about 14.50 an hour at IAD right no; if that gets subbed out to n outfit like US Security Associates, Securitas or G4s, you're looking at guys who washed/passed over for out of the policy academy, college kid wannabes, and retirees, working for $8.oo /hr. You think power trips are bad now...

The people demanding heads roll are politicians, effectively arms of the government...and they are arguing it to increase their own power. The size of the U.S. govt is a travesty.

Going thru airport security screening is my least favorite part of air travel. Having been as an airport screener myself at one point I have some understanding how it all works. Certainly the system and procedures have improved a lot, esp. since 2001. However, I must concur that it's not really security.