4 ms·

The TSA has never found a bomb.

dgzl 8y ago
Most underrated comment.
DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
I don't think that statement, by itself, tells us much about the TSA's efficacy. Because their mere presence could be an effective deterrent.
- lostcolony 8y ago
  We know at least two made it through. Underwear bomber, shoe bomber. We also know pre-9/11 how common it was (non-existent). We also know that they consistently fail audits. Though they've gotten better! Most recently they only failed ~75% of the time at detecting things auditors were trying to smuggle in, instead of the prior 95%! So, yeah, by itself it doesn't. But we have enough data to make a pretty solid eval.
  - mikeyouse 8y ago
    Both the underwear bomber and shoe bomber boarded flights overseas (Amsterdam and Paris respectively) -- so no TSA involvement.
    - acct1771 8y ago
      Underwear bomber was Saudi intelligence/CIA, for the reader's info.
    - goobynight 8y ago
      The TSA has operated overseas before, but probably not in these countries. If they see a country isn't up to their standard, I think they either show up to implement it for flights headed to the US or at least consult with the nation.
- shawnz 8y ago
  But the parent comment wasn't regarding the efficacy of the TSA, it was regarding the dangers of being a TSA agent
  - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
    All the parent wrote was: > The TSA has never found a bomb. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand how that supports your statement.
    - shawnz 8y ago
      They were replying to a comment which implied that the main risk of working for the TSA is dealing with bombs. But the TSA has never dealt with any bombs, so clearly that's not actually a risk of working there.
devonkim 8y ago
...that was reported. Question is whether whose interest it would be in to not publicly report on the number of bombs found by an agency. I can understand NSA and CIA not revealing much but am confused about TSA’s motives since they are much more public facing than anything in the intelligence community.

dgzl 8y ago

Most underrated comment.

I don't think that statement, by itself, tells us much about the TSA's efficacy. Because their mere presence could be an effective deterrent.

lostcolony 8y ago
We know at least two made it through. Underwear bomber, shoe bomber. We also know pre-9/11 how common it was (non-existent). We also know that they consistently fail audits. Though they've gotten better! Most recently they only failed ~75% of the time at detecting things auditors were trying to smuggle in, instead of the prior 95%! So, yeah, by itself it doesn't. But we have enough data to make a pretty solid eval.
- mikeyouse 8y ago
  Both the underwear bomber and shoe bomber boarded flights overseas (Amsterdam and Paris respectively) -- so no TSA involvement.
  - acct1771 8y ago
    Underwear bomber was Saudi intelligence/CIA, for the reader's info.
  - goobynight 8y ago
    The TSA has operated overseas before, but probably not in these countries. If they see a country isn't up to their standard, I think they either show up to implement it for flights headed to the US or at least consult with the nation.
shawnz 8y ago
But the parent comment wasn't regarding the efficacy of the TSA, it was regarding the dangers of being a TSA agent
- DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
  All the parent wrote was: > The TSA has never found a bomb. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand how that supports your statement.
  - shawnz 8y ago
    They were replying to a comment which implied that the main risk of working for the TSA is dealing with bombs. But the TSA has never dealt with any bombs, so clearly that's not actually a risk of working there.

devonkim 8y ago

...that was reported. Question is whether whose interest it would be in to not publicly report on the number of bombs found by an agency. I can understand NSA and CIA not revealing much but am confused about TSA’s motives since they are much more public facing than anything in the intelligence community.