5 ms·

TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

181 points by SunshineTheCat 7mo ago

SunshineTheCat 7mo ago
Time for Remy to make another video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQJ7E140-SQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQJ7E140-SQ
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
QuercusMax 7mo ago
Like other post-9/11 things like DHS and ICE, we need to abolish TSA since it doesn't actually keep anyone safe, and actively harms people.
- j_walter 7mo ago
  So just get rid of TSA and have no security? They find hundreds of guns in carry on baggage every year, but that should be no big deal right? They didn't force this person through the scanner, they could have asked for a supervisor and discussed the situation. Don't trust the people at the bottom of any organization if you have a concern.
  - RHSeeger 7mo ago
    You do know there was airport security before the TSA took over, right?
    - MostlyStable 7mo ago
      While I agree that TSA should be done away with, I'm afraid that it wouldn't actually change what airport security looks like in most places. At this point, since people have gotten used to it, my guess is that if Airports took over their own security again (or went back to however it worked pre-TSA), they would maintain about the same standards and procedures in an effort to avoid blame in the case that something happened. Regardless of government involvement, it is extremely hard to work back these ratchets on security theater.
      - asdff 7mo ago
        Yeah private security at some stuff pretty much already looks like TSA just with a cheaper scanner.
      - JoshTriplett 7mo ago
        On the contrary, I think airports would desperately like to do better. Airports are hated; improving the experience of airport security is extremely important to them.
        lokar 7mo ago
        If you pay enough, you can in fact get a much better experience (in some airports).
        JoshTriplett 7mo ago
        This is true, though how much better still has airport security as a major limiting factor.
        lokar 7mo ago
        You can get a private screening
        QuercusMax 7mo ago
        I could legit see an airport in a major metro advertise "Fly through PDQ instead of SRX - you'll save an hour of your time and nobody will ask to touch your genitals"
      - anonymousab 7mo ago
        Blame/lawsuit avoidance is a powerful motivation to keep things the same. But there's also a very strong drive to reduce costs, and this would be a very enticing cost center, for better or worse. Hard to say how things would play out.
      - wat10000 7mo ago
  - Cycl0ps 7mo ago
    >They didn't force this person through the scanner "Despite the woman's request for a pat-down search, a TSA agent told her that her only option was to pass through the AIT device." >they could have asked for a supervisor and discussed the situation "Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant."
  - fwip 7mo ago
    Studies seem to indicate that for every gun they find, they miss at least two more.
  - ceejayoz 7mo ago
    > They find hundreds of guns in carry on baggage every year… They don't exactly have a great track record in that regard. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-us-airports-allowed-weapons-through-n367851 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-... "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." (Don't worry, though. They fixed it... by classifing the reports. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/noem-dhs-watchdog-feuding-over-classified-airport-security-risk-report/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/noem-dhs-watchdog-feuding-over-...)
    - kube-system 7mo ago
      They're not mutually exclusive things. Red-teamers often have quite a bit of expertise and are smarter than your average threat. And the point of these exercises is precisely to continually improve in response to the findings. But alas, most of the people who bring guns on to planes aren't threats anyway (at least not in the typical sense), they're idiots who forgot their CCW in their bag.
      - ceejayoz 7mo ago
        > Red-teamers often have quite a bit of expertise and are smarter than your average threat. That is not super comforting. > And the point of these exercises is precisely to continually improve in response to the findings. Then they should proudly release some more recent results showing that improvement! > Most of the people who bring guns on to planes aren't trying to hide anything at all, they're idiots who forgot their CCW in their bag. Which means they aren't even bothering trying to hide it.
      - Hizonner 7mo ago
        > smarter than your average threat Well, there's a good candidate for the dumbest assumption I'm going to see this month.
        kube-system 7mo ago
  - dsr_ 7mo ago
    They miss more guns than they find. They miss more knives than they find.* They did, in fact, summon a supervisor, who lied to her. *I am of the opinion that, since 9/11, passengers should be encouraged to have knives rather than discouraged. Knives won't get through the cockpit door; no one will open the cockpit doors for a hostage anymore.
    - lokar 7mo ago
      Given how unruly and belligerent some passengers have become I think flight crews would correctly object to allowing knives.
  - JoshTriplett 7mo ago
    > So just get rid of TSA and have no security? Nobody said that. Go back to pre-2001 airport security, together with locked cockpit doors and the widespread understanding that it isn't safe to cooperate with hijackers.
  - MBCook 7mo ago
    Have you noticed that in 25 years they have never managed to catch a single terrorist? Do you think they would’ve been quiet if they did? No way. Random citizens on planes have. At least once. We’ve had lots of stories about them missing weapons. Lots of stories about them making up ridiculous rules. Lots of stories about them sexually harassing people. Lots of stories about random agents going mad with power. They have never accomplished anything that wasn’t accomplished by the much simpler and less invasive security we had before 9/11.
  - mikestew 7mo ago
    So just get rid of TSA and have no security? No one suggested that. What do you think we did 30 years ago (look it up if you have to)? That, and locked cockpit doors: what value-add is TSA over procedures from 30 years ago?
    - carefree-bob 7mo ago
      It would be nice if there were evidence based requirements for new security features and rollback if subsequent data showed them to be ineffictive. There is a lot of security theater happening at airports.
    - kube-system 7mo ago
      Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. When there is no coordination between airlines, none of them wants to be the one who implements tough security and pisses off their customer base.
      - mikestew 7mo ago
        …even though hijackings regularly happened Maybe in the 70s, but that pretty much stopped with advent of metal detectors. And the hijackers had guns, not knives. Before 9/11 I carried a pocket knife on every flight I took. Regardless, they’re doing it now, so I fail to see your point.
        QuercusMax 7mo ago
        Before 9/11, my dad and I used to carry our fishing tackle boxes onto the plane because we didn't trust them to go through baggage handling. One time my dad brought a 10-inch fish gutting knife on a flight and didn't realize it until we got to our destination. Sailed right through the metal detectors and x-ray machines.
      - ceejayoz 7mo ago
        > Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. Yes, because in most cases the hijackers would demand you land, negotiate, and either get some sort of asylum deal or get shot. Big inconvenience, but usually not much bloodshed. 9/11 changed the math for the people on the plane a lot, from "sit down, be quiet, and you'll probably be fine" to "you are about to be flown into a building". Reinforced cockpit doors are one of the little bits of legitimate security improvement made since then. Look how many on the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings end with "no casualties".
  - jollyllama 7mo ago
    In the 50's, you could board a plane with a gun and no ID.
  - wat10000 7mo ago
    So we're supposed to trust people at the bottom of this organization to detect and safely confiscate a terrorist's firearm, but not to follow their own policies about alternative search procedures?
- kube-system 7mo ago
  I do think there's an advantage to third-party security, but they need to be properly trained -- airline-managed security has perverse incentives because of their profit motive.
  - bigbuppo 7mo ago
    Perverse profit motive like them not losing a big expensive aircraft, or having a massive loss of confidence in the airline to keep customers safe that causes them to go bankrupt?
    - kube-system 7mo ago
      If the only risk they care about is a hull loss or reputation, then yes, that's an example of a perverse profit motive, because there are other threats to life and limb that exist.
  - lokar 7mo ago
    SFO has its own security, they seem better then TSA
- hparadiz 7mo ago
  It's sad that this is getting down voted. What have we become.
  - youarentrightjr 7mo ago
    There's been a slow shift here over the past decade, from "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" to "If you don't agree with what I think a nanny state should be doing you're a terrible person" What I wonder is if this is brought on by a demographic shift or a viewpoint shift among the same demographic.
    - Macha 7mo ago
      It feels like there's different restrictions pushed by different groups. Gen Z is pretty prudish and seems to be the most in support of some of the adult content or internet censorship, while anti-LGBT/bathroom policing/etc seems to be more of the older generations.
    - wat10000 7mo ago
      There was a pretty much instantaneous shift on a certain Tuesday morning in September of 2001. I haven't noticed much of a change since then. The whole national mood has been "better safe than sorry" for anything vaguely terrorism-adjacent ever since.
  - ssl-3 7mo ago
    There's all kinds of people in the world. It's good to be accepting. It is fine by me that a person might have a powerful lust for the taste of boot leather. I don't kink shame. I just wish I didn't have to be a part of it.
- Buttons840 7mo ago
  You say abolish TSA. That's a "how"; let me ask you about outcomes to better understand. Are you suggesting that the level of security at airports be reduced? Are you suggesting that people and object that get onto planes be given less scrutiny?
  - Gibbon1 7mo ago
    So every year the TSA wastes about 60,000 man years.
  - justin66 7mo ago
    I think the OP's meaning was entirely clear and engaging with your questions could only obscure their message.
  - realo 7mo ago
    Someone in the thread mentioned that in a red team test 95% of the guns were passed undetected under the very noses of your TSA. That is what you call security?
  - toomuchtodo 7mo ago
    Reinforced flight deck doors are sufficient. See: the rest of the world. TSA is a jobs program and to soothe the irrational and those poor at risk management. At $10 Billion A Year, TSA Still Fails 90% Of The Time—And Covers It Up - https://viewfromthewing.com/at-10-billion-a-year-tsa-still-fails-90-of-the-time-and-covers-it-up/ https://viewfromthewing.com/at-10-billion-a-year-tsa-still-f... - January 27th, 2025 TSA Admits New Machines Are Slowing Security To A Crawl—And Says Screening Won’t Improve Until 2040 - https://viewfromthewing.com/tsa-admits-new-machines-are-slowing-security-to-a-crawl-and-says-screening-wont-improve-until-2040/ https://viewfromthewing.com/tsa-admits-new-machines-are-slow... - August 10th, 2024 > But TSA itself has filed in court documents that they’ve been unaware of actual threats to aviation that they’re guarding against, and they haven’t stopped any actual terrorists (nor with past failure rates at detecting threats were they deterring any, either). Accidentally Revealed Document Shows TSA Doesn't Think Terrorists Are Plotting To Attack Airplanes - https://www.techdirt.com/2013/10/21/accidentally-revealed-document-shows-tsa-doesnt-think-terrorists-are-plotting-to-attack-airplanes/ https://www.techdirt.com/2013/10/21/accidentally-revealed-do... - October 21st, 2013
sidewndr46 7mo ago
[flagged]
- pseudalopex 7mo ago
  > Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
- fzeroracer 7mo ago
  From the article you said you've read: > Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.
  - sidewndr46 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    - mzajc 7mo ago
      Out of curiosity, are you replying with these incredibly bad takes to trip the flame war detector, or is there another reason?
      - sidewndr46 7mo ago
        We're in this really weird world where have this obviously useless to the public agency. It does in fact serve a purpose to the government. But it's useless to the public, at least in the form of officers deployed to airports. Yet we still wind up with these stories where some TSA employee says something and for some reason people just roll with it. I am just left in awe that this is possible. Especially in the case of an individual with a medical implant. Almost certainly a medical professional told them to never do this. Why would someone take a such an action based off a TSA employee's statement? I will not even use the word "risk" because the outcome here is known in advance. Just for perspective, I had a TSA officer proudly explain to me without any conversation (I did not want to speak to him) on my part that his qualifications for working there were "could not get into any other federal job, so they sent me here!"
MBCook 7mo ago
I’ve been in a film photography sub on Reddit lately and the TSA comes up frequently. They can’t even follow their own rules on film, telling people it has to be scanned (it doesn’t), scanning is safe up 3800 ISO (that’s not a speed), etc. I’m not surprised they can’t get something important right. What if someone had to fly for necessary medical treatment? What if the device had been something even more important, like a pacemaker or artificial heart like Cheney had?
- SunshineTheCat 7mo ago
  Yea I once had a TSA individual take my 85mm f1.2 RF series Canon lens out of its case and hold it up to the light to "inspect it." I said, "can you please be careful with that? It's a $3,000 lens..." The person cut me off and flatly stated: "Excuse me sir, I know what I'm doing..." The great thing is that if the person had dropped it, they would've faced zero consequences and I would be out a lens which was central to my need to travel.
  - ssl-3 7mo ago
    I don't intend for this to sound like an excuse. I don't fly often, and almost never with anything expensive. But I am curious: Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA? Is that a thing that regular people can easily find coverage for?
    - k2enemy 7mo ago
      Every photographer with expensive equipment that I know has insurance for their equipment. Sometimes it is included with homeowner, sometimes a separate rider, and sometimes part of their commercial insurance. So it would be covered. However, that wouldn't help OP if they needed the lens for their trip, suddenly need to find another one, and needed to float the cash until insurance pays out.
      - cptskippy 7mo ago
        Renting camera equipment is fairly common and their are rental services that do overnight and next day.
0xTJ 7mo ago
Not shocking they seem to have pretty low professional standards. I recently had a friend travelling from the US back to Canada get suddenly thoroughly frisked without warning after the scanners showed some object near her thighs. She didn't have anything but clothes on her body on below the waist. The TSA agent spent time groping around, convinced there was something, then after there couldn't possibly have been an object under her clothes, accepted that (paraphrasing) "there must have been an issue with the scanner". She called her partner (who I was with at the time) afterwards, upset and shaken by the experience. @TSA in one of the NYC airports: If you're not going to get consent to grope girls, at least let them know that you're about to do it.
- Grazester 7mo ago
  It has been my experience that they would call a female agent when they needed to pat down another female. Has this changed?
  - 0xTJ 7mo ago
    It was a female agent, that doesn't mean that it's okay to start groping someone without warning.
    - lokar 7mo ago
      Yeah, IME they recite a script (I’ve heard it many times) where they explain why they are doing it, what it will involve, and how you can refuse (in that case, it would probably mean not flying that day). And offer to do it in private.
    - Chris2048 7mo ago
      You phrased it as "If you're not going to get consent to grope girls", so why is it relevant that she is female?
      - 0xTJ 7mo ago
        Mostly to make a point; more people are likely to care about it not being okay if it's phrased that way. (Something, something, toxic masculinity, "suck it up tough guy, can't handle a little pat-down?") The fact that the TSA agent a woman doesn't automatically make someone else comfortable with whatever liberties the agent feels like taking. It's still likely worse if it's a man doing it, but sharing a gender isn't an excuse for the agent to do whatever they want.
chaps 7mo ago
I'm one of those weirdos who opts out of the scanners because I'd rather avoid having people casually look inside of my body. Last time I flew out of Laguardia I opted out and while I was being patted down another TSA agent about twenty feet away kept making kissy faces at me. Very much felt like intimidation. What a time..
- mindslight 7mo ago
  Talk about l'esprit d'escalier. I'd like to think I would have held eye contact and pointed at my own crotch.
  - rngfnby 7mo ago
    Hmm next time they go for a feel I'll tell them not to sexually harass me loud enough for the whole line to hear. They feed on folks wanting to avoid embarrassment, not wanting to miss their flights, etc.
    - BobaFloutist 7mo ago
      Also on folks not wanting to have their shit stolen, get beaten up, or get extra-judicially detained for days, weeks, or even months. They're smart enough to make compliance be the mostly rational decision.
- rngfnby 7mo ago
  We're not weirdos. The weirdos are the cattle walking into a microwave oven. They ask me "would you like a private screening?" Hell no! I need witnesses.
- whatsupdog 7mo ago
  I do that too. My reason is I don't want unneeded radiation. My experience is they make it as difficult as possible. They first ignore you couple of times, pretend they don't know what you are asking for, and finally they make you wait a long time, just standing there waiting for someone to show up to do the pat down. But I know their antics now and show up with plenty of time to spare.
ekjhgkejhgk 7mo ago
I flew to the USA a few years ago and TSA staff were the most gratuitously rude people I've met in airports in my life. Complete brain dead losers.
- dexwiz 7mo ago
  It's a job program. And mostly theater to dehumanize you. Most VIPs get to skip it all together.
- lokar 7mo ago
  LHR security is just as bad IME
  - ekjhgkejhgk 7mo ago
    Get the fuck outta here.
  - ninjin 7mo ago
    Indeed, Heathrow security is the rudest I have experienced. They get aggressive if you so much as ask a question. Furthermore, I have on numerous occasions had them argue with me to go against the medical advice from both doctors and medical advice manufacturers. Last time going as far as claiming that a scanner does not emit electromagnetic radiation.
meatmanek 7mo ago
I want to know more about the mechanism of damage to a spinal implant from (what I assume is) a millimeter-wave scanner. I would expect millimeter waves to not penetrate very deeply -- Wikipedia says "typically less than 1 mm" (their citation for that is behind a paywall though.) Seems like an implant should be more than 1mm below the surface.
- Balgair 7mo ago
  Like the top of your skull, the boney bits on your spine can be less than a mm from the air. Especially if you're a woman or are elderly or are quite sick and recovering. Many things can affect skin thickness. Also, that depth is probably the FWHM of the decay curve, so it is reaching a bit deeper but at lower amplitudes. Also the scanner has some quirks of its own, so who knows really what the exact specifics of that particular scanner are on that day.
Trasmatta 7mo ago
I have type 1 diabetes and have a CGM and insulin pump on me at all times. The manufacturers say you shouldn't take them through the scanners, but me and every diabetic I know has never experienced any issues with the devices, so most of us just go through the scanner and then have to be patted down anyway because it picks up the device. I dread it every time, because when I've tried to inform TSA agents ahead of time about my medical devices (which all the signs tell you to do!) they either ignore me or just tell me to go through. And then when I don't mention it, I frequently get berated on the other side, while they do the swab test for explosives.
SoftTalker 7mo ago
I'm not a particular fan of the TSA but when you work with the public at that scale, stuff happens. It gets a bit tiresome to read articles like this that imply it's normal and frequent. It doesn't seem like it's worthy of discussion on HN: it's neither intellectually interesting nor a new phenomenon. I've never had a single issue with the TSA. I went through a checkpoint when I had a shoulder injury and could not raise my arms above my head for the backscatter machine. I explained this and I was politely escorted through the alternate scan/metal detector. My experience is one data point, doesn't mean much by itself, nor does the experience of the unfortunate person in this story.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
T3RMINATED 7mo ago
Abolish the TSA
ChrisMarshallNY 7mo ago
Whenever these situations come up, the solution is always "more train." I suspect "MOAR PAIN" would have a better outcome. People check out, during training; especially the type of training that is designed to shield the organization from lawsuits, and are given by uninspired, bored speakers. Some high-profile object lessons are more likely to have an effect.
idle_zealot 7mo ago
There's no consistency in procedure from TSA agents. They're undertrained, unaccountable, and some combination of bored, disinterested, and high on petty authority. I don't think any amount of training or official guidance could improve the situation, though. The essential problem is the authority plus unaccountability or oversight. That will always go poorly for anyone subjected to that authority sooner or later.
- gensym 7mo ago
  Perhaps once AI destroys all the livelihoods of educated and disciplined white collar workers, it'll be easier for the TSA to find people who can follow basic instructions and show a normal amount of empathy.
  - readthenotes1 7mo ago
    And then the job will drive that empathy right out of them.
  - bichiliad 7mo ago
    I think it's the job, not the person. All sorts of people work at the TSA; clearly it's endemic to the TSA, not to the people who work there.
    - MBCook 7mo ago
      You have to deal with pissed people all day who don’t listen at all. And if you make the tiniest mistake you could be the person who failed to stop the next 9/11. Doing the same three or four things screening people all day long has got to be mind numbingly boring. Unless you’re at an airport that isn’t constantly busy where instead you get to stand around doing nothing, which can be worse. It honestly sounds like a terrible job to have. Aren’t they paid pretty bad too? I can see why a lot of people would want to move out of it, leaving only those who are stuck or like the power. None of this is excuse what happened in the article.
      - 7mo ago
proee 7mo ago
I brought a $14k oscilloscope through TSA once. They flagged the unit and proceeded to inspect it, lifting it by the edges of the plastic front cover and trying to remove it while held in mid-air. I kind of freaked out and said "stop" because the oscilloscope was about to take a free-fall. They were not happy that I spoke up, but luckily it averted a crisis.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
rngfnby 7mo ago
Atlanta TSA are the absolute worst. I've lived in Atlanta for a while and used ATL quite a bit. They're easily the most aggressive, arrogant, stupid, obnoxious and self-righteous of all the TSA Ive used. Ive even had an altercation with them that ended up having to file a complaint (never heard back) and got to speak to a manager only because I started, loudly, whistling the anthem.
dogemaster2025 7mo ago
[flagged]
- dogemaster2025 7mo ago
  [flagged]

181 points by SunshineTheCat 7mo ago

Time for Remy to make another video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQJ7E140-SQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQJ7E140-SQ

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

QuercusMax 7mo ago

Like other post-9/11 things like DHS and ICE, we need to abolish TSA since it doesn't actually keep anyone safe, and actively harms people.

j_walter 7mo ago
So just get rid of TSA and have no security? They find hundreds of guns in carry on baggage every year, but that should be no big deal right? They didn't force this person through the scanner, they could have asked for a supervisor and discussed the situation. Don't trust the people at the bottom of any organization if you have a concern.
- RHSeeger 7mo ago
  You do know there was airport security before the TSA took over, right?
  - MostlyStable 7mo ago
    While I agree that TSA should be done away with, I'm afraid that it wouldn't actually change what airport security looks like in most places. At this point, since people have gotten used to it, my guess is that if Airports took over their own security again (or went back to however it worked pre-TSA), they would maintain about the same standards and procedures in an effort to avoid blame in the case that something happened. Regardless of government involvement, it is extremely hard to work back these ratchets on security theater.
    - asdff 7mo ago
      Yeah private security at some stuff pretty much already looks like TSA just with a cheaper scanner.
    - JoshTriplett 7mo ago
      On the contrary, I think airports would desperately like to do better. Airports are hated; improving the experience of airport security is extremely important to them.
      - lokar 7mo ago
        If you pay enough, you can in fact get a much better experience (in some airports).
        JoshTriplett 7mo ago
        This is true, though how much better still has airport security as a major limiting factor.
        lokar 7mo ago
        You can get a private screening
      - QuercusMax 7mo ago
        I could legit see an airport in a major metro advertise "Fly through PDQ instead of SRX - you'll save an hour of your time and nobody will ask to touch your genitals"
    - anonymousab 7mo ago
      Blame/lawsuit avoidance is a powerful motivation to keep things the same. But there's also a very strong drive to reduce costs, and this would be a very enticing cost center, for better or worse. Hard to say how things would play out.
    - wat10000 7mo ago
- Cycl0ps 7mo ago
  >They didn't force this person through the scanner "Despite the woman's request for a pat-down search, a TSA agent told her that her only option was to pass through the AIT device." >they could have asked for a supervisor and discussed the situation "Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant."
- fwip 7mo ago
  Studies seem to indicate that for every gun they find, they miss at least two more.
- ceejayoz 7mo ago
  > They find hundreds of guns in carry on baggage every year… They don't exactly have a great track record in that regard. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-us-airports-allowed-weapons-through-n367851 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-... "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." (Don't worry, though. They fixed it... by classifing the reports. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/noem-dhs-watchdog-feuding-over-classified-airport-security-risk-report/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/noem-dhs-watchdog-feuding-over-...)
  - kube-system 7mo ago
    They're not mutually exclusive things. Red-teamers often have quite a bit of expertise and are smarter than your average threat. And the point of these exercises is precisely to continually improve in response to the findings. But alas, most of the people who bring guns on to planes aren't threats anyway (at least not in the typical sense), they're idiots who forgot their CCW in their bag.
    - ceejayoz 7mo ago
      > Red-teamers often have quite a bit of expertise and are smarter than your average threat. That is not super comforting. > And the point of these exercises is precisely to continually improve in response to the findings. Then they should proudly release some more recent results showing that improvement! > Most of the people who bring guns on to planes aren't trying to hide anything at all, they're idiots who forgot their CCW in their bag. Which means they aren't even bothering trying to hide it.
    - Hizonner 7mo ago
      > smarter than your average threat Well, there's a good candidate for the dumbest assumption I'm going to see this month.
      - kube-system 7mo ago
- dsr_ 7mo ago
  They miss more guns than they find. They miss more knives than they find.* They did, in fact, summon a supervisor, who lied to her. *I am of the opinion that, since 9/11, passengers should be encouraged to have knives rather than discouraged. Knives won't get through the cockpit door; no one will open the cockpit doors for a hostage anymore.
  - lokar 7mo ago
    Given how unruly and belligerent some passengers have become I think flight crews would correctly object to allowing knives.
- JoshTriplett 7mo ago
  > So just get rid of TSA and have no security? Nobody said that. Go back to pre-2001 airport security, together with locked cockpit doors and the widespread understanding that it isn't safe to cooperate with hijackers.
- MBCook 7mo ago
  Have you noticed that in 25 years they have never managed to catch a single terrorist? Do you think they would’ve been quiet if they did? No way. Random citizens on planes have. At least once. We’ve had lots of stories about them missing weapons. Lots of stories about them making up ridiculous rules. Lots of stories about them sexually harassing people. Lots of stories about random agents going mad with power. They have never accomplished anything that wasn’t accomplished by the much simpler and less invasive security we had before 9/11.
- mikestew 7mo ago
  So just get rid of TSA and have no security? No one suggested that. What do you think we did 30 years ago (look it up if you have to)? That, and locked cockpit doors: what value-add is TSA over procedures from 30 years ago?
  - carefree-bob 7mo ago
    It would be nice if there were evidence based requirements for new security features and rollback if subsequent data showed them to be ineffictive. There is a lot of security theater happening at airports.
  - kube-system 7mo ago
    Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. When there is no coordination between airlines, none of them wants to be the one who implements tough security and pisses off their customer base.
    - mikestew 7mo ago
      …even though hijackings regularly happened Maybe in the 70s, but that pretty much stopped with advent of metal detectors. And the hijackers had guns, not knives. Before 9/11 I carried a pocket knife on every flight I took. Regardless, they’re doing it now, so I fail to see your point.
      - QuercusMax 7mo ago
        Before 9/11, my dad and I used to carry our fishing tackle boxes onto the plane because we didn't trust them to go through baggage handling. One time my dad brought a 10-inch fish gutting knife on a flight and didn't realize it until we got to our destination. Sailed right through the metal detectors and x-ray machines.
    - ceejayoz 7mo ago
      > Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. Yes, because in most cases the hijackers would demand you land, negotiate, and either get some sort of asylum deal or get shot. Big inconvenience, but usually not much bloodshed. 9/11 changed the math for the people on the plane a lot, from "sit down, be quiet, and you'll probably be fine" to "you are about to be flown into a building". Reinforced cockpit doors are one of the little bits of legitimate security improvement made since then. Look how many on the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings end with "no casualties".
- jollyllama 7mo ago
  In the 50's, you could board a plane with a gun and no ID.
- wat10000 7mo ago
  So we're supposed to trust people at the bottom of this organization to detect and safely confiscate a terrorist's firearm, but not to follow their own policies about alternative search procedures?
kube-system 7mo ago
I do think there's an advantage to third-party security, but they need to be properly trained -- airline-managed security has perverse incentives because of their profit motive.
- bigbuppo 7mo ago
  Perverse profit motive like them not losing a big expensive aircraft, or having a massive loss of confidence in the airline to keep customers safe that causes them to go bankrupt?
  - kube-system 7mo ago
    If the only risk they care about is a hull loss or reputation, then yes, that's an example of a perverse profit motive, because there are other threats to life and limb that exist.
- lokar 7mo ago
  SFO has its own security, they seem better then TSA
hparadiz 7mo ago
It's sad that this is getting down voted. What have we become.
- youarentrightjr 7mo ago
  There's been a slow shift here over the past decade, from "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" to "If you don't agree with what I think a nanny state should be doing you're a terrible person" What I wonder is if this is brought on by a demographic shift or a viewpoint shift among the same demographic.
  - Macha 7mo ago
    It feels like there's different restrictions pushed by different groups. Gen Z is pretty prudish and seems to be the most in support of some of the adult content or internet censorship, while anti-LGBT/bathroom policing/etc seems to be more of the older generations.
  - wat10000 7mo ago
    There was a pretty much instantaneous shift on a certain Tuesday morning in September of 2001. I haven't noticed much of a change since then. The whole national mood has been "better safe than sorry" for anything vaguely terrorism-adjacent ever since.
- ssl-3 7mo ago
  There's all kinds of people in the world. It's good to be accepting. It is fine by me that a person might have a powerful lust for the taste of boot leather. I don't kink shame. I just wish I didn't have to be a part of it.
Buttons840 7mo ago
You say abolish TSA. That's a "how"; let me ask you about outcomes to better understand. Are you suggesting that the level of security at airports be reduced? Are you suggesting that people and object that get onto planes be given less scrutiny?
- Gibbon1 7mo ago
  So every year the TSA wastes about 60,000 man years.
- justin66 7mo ago
  I think the OP's meaning was entirely clear and engaging with your questions could only obscure their message.
- realo 7mo ago
  Someone in the thread mentioned that in a red team test 95% of the guns were passed undetected under the very noses of your TSA. That is what you call security?
- toomuchtodo 7mo ago
  Reinforced flight deck doors are sufficient. See: the rest of the world. TSA is a jobs program and to soothe the irrational and those poor at risk management. At $10 Billion A Year, TSA Still Fails 90% Of The Time—And Covers It Up - https://viewfromthewing.com/at-10-billion-a-year-tsa-still-fails-90-of-the-time-and-covers-it-up/ https://viewfromthewing.com/at-10-billion-a-year-tsa-still-f... - January 27th, 2025 TSA Admits New Machines Are Slowing Security To A Crawl—And Says Screening Won’t Improve Until 2040 - https://viewfromthewing.com/tsa-admits-new-machines-are-slowing-security-to-a-crawl-and-says-screening-wont-improve-until-2040/ https://viewfromthewing.com/tsa-admits-new-machines-are-slow... - August 10th, 2024 > But TSA itself has filed in court documents that they’ve been unaware of actual threats to aviation that they’re guarding against, and they haven’t stopped any actual terrorists (nor with past failure rates at detecting threats were they deterring any, either). Accidentally Revealed Document Shows TSA Doesn't Think Terrorists Are Plotting To Attack Airplanes - https://www.techdirt.com/2013/10/21/accidentally-revealed-document-shows-tsa-doesnt-think-terrorists-are-plotting-to-attack-airplanes/ https://www.techdirt.com/2013/10/21/accidentally-revealed-do... - October 21st, 2013

sidewndr46 7mo ago

[flagged]

pseudalopex 7mo ago
> Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
fzeroracer 7mo ago
From the article you said you've read: > Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.
- sidewndr46 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - mzajc 7mo ago
    Out of curiosity, are you replying with these incredibly bad takes to trip the flame war detector, or is there another reason?
    - sidewndr46 7mo ago
      We're in this really weird world where have this obviously useless to the public agency. It does in fact serve a purpose to the government. But it's useless to the public, at least in the form of officers deployed to airports. Yet we still wind up with these stories where some TSA employee says something and for some reason people just roll with it. I am just left in awe that this is possible. Especially in the case of an individual with a medical implant. Almost certainly a medical professional told them to never do this. Why would someone take a such an action based off a TSA employee's statement? I will not even use the word "risk" because the outcome here is known in advance. Just for perspective, I had a TSA officer proudly explain to me without any conversation (I did not want to speak to him) on my part that his qualifications for working there were "could not get into any other federal job, so they sent me here!"

MBCook 7mo ago

I’ve been in a film photography sub on Reddit lately and the TSA comes up frequently. They can’t even follow their own rules on film, telling people it has to be scanned (it doesn’t), scanning is safe up 3800 ISO (that’s not a speed), etc. I’m not surprised they can’t get something important right. What if someone had to fly for necessary medical treatment? What if the device had been something even more important, like a pacemaker or artificial heart like Cheney had?

SunshineTheCat 7mo ago
Yea I once had a TSA individual take my 85mm f1.2 RF series Canon lens out of its case and hold it up to the light to "inspect it." I said, "can you please be careful with that? It's a $3,000 lens..." The person cut me off and flatly stated: "Excuse me sir, I know what I'm doing..." The great thing is that if the person had dropped it, they would've faced zero consequences and I would be out a lens which was central to my need to travel.
- ssl-3 7mo ago
  I don't intend for this to sound like an excuse. I don't fly often, and almost never with anything expensive. But I am curious: Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA? Is that a thing that regular people can easily find coverage for?
  - k2enemy 7mo ago
    Every photographer with expensive equipment that I know has insurance for their equipment. Sometimes it is included with homeowner, sometimes a separate rider, and sometimes part of their commercial insurance. So it would be covered. However, that wouldn't help OP if they needed the lens for their trip, suddenly need to find another one, and needed to float the cash until insurance pays out.
    - cptskippy 7mo ago
      Renting camera equipment is fairly common and their are rental services that do overnight and next day.

0xTJ 7mo ago

Not shocking they seem to have pretty low professional standards. I recently had a friend travelling from the US back to Canada get suddenly thoroughly frisked without warning after the scanners showed some object near her thighs. She didn't have anything but clothes on her body on below the waist. The TSA agent spent time groping around, convinced there was something, then after there couldn't possibly have been an object under her clothes, accepted that (paraphrasing) "there must have been an issue with the scanner". She called her partner (who I was with at the time) afterwards, upset and shaken by the experience. @TSA in one of the NYC airports: If you're not going to get consent to grope girls, at least let them know that you're about to do it.

Grazester 7mo ago
It has been my experience that they would call a female agent when they needed to pat down another female. Has this changed?
- 0xTJ 7mo ago
  It was a female agent, that doesn't mean that it's okay to start groping someone without warning.
  - lokar 7mo ago
    Yeah, IME they recite a script (I’ve heard it many times) where they explain why they are doing it, what it will involve, and how you can refuse (in that case, it would probably mean not flying that day). And offer to do it in private.
  - Chris2048 7mo ago
    You phrased it as "If you're not going to get consent to grope girls", so why is it relevant that she is female?
    - 0xTJ 7mo ago
      Mostly to make a point; more people are likely to care about it not being okay if it's phrased that way. (Something, something, toxic masculinity, "suck it up tough guy, can't handle a little pat-down?") The fact that the TSA agent a woman doesn't automatically make someone else comfortable with whatever liberties the agent feels like taking. It's still likely worse if it's a man doing it, but sharing a gender isn't an excuse for the agent to do whatever they want.

chaps 7mo ago

I'm one of those weirdos who opts out of the scanners because I'd rather avoid having people casually look inside of my body. Last time I flew out of Laguardia I opted out and while I was being patted down another TSA agent about twenty feet away kept making kissy faces at me. Very much felt like intimidation. What a time..

mindslight 7mo ago
Talk about l'esprit d'escalier. I'd like to think I would have held eye contact and pointed at my own crotch.
- rngfnby 7mo ago
  Hmm next time they go for a feel I'll tell them not to sexually harass me loud enough for the whole line to hear. They feed on folks wanting to avoid embarrassment, not wanting to miss their flights, etc.
  - BobaFloutist 7mo ago
    Also on folks not wanting to have their shit stolen, get beaten up, or get extra-judicially detained for days, weeks, or even months. They're smart enough to make compliance be the mostly rational decision.
rngfnby 7mo ago
We're not weirdos. The weirdos are the cattle walking into a microwave oven. They ask me "would you like a private screening?" Hell no! I need witnesses.
whatsupdog 7mo ago
I do that too. My reason is I don't want unneeded radiation. My experience is they make it as difficult as possible. They first ignore you couple of times, pretend they don't know what you are asking for, and finally they make you wait a long time, just standing there waiting for someone to show up to do the pat down. But I know their antics now and show up with plenty of time to spare.

ekjhgkejhgk 7mo ago

I flew to the USA a few years ago and TSA staff were the most gratuitously rude people I've met in airports in my life. Complete brain dead losers.

dexwiz 7mo ago
It's a job program. And mostly theater to dehumanize you. Most VIPs get to skip it all together.
lokar 7mo ago
LHR security is just as bad IME
- ekjhgkejhgk 7mo ago
  Get the fuck outta here.
- ninjin 7mo ago
  Indeed, Heathrow security is the rudest I have experienced. They get aggressive if you so much as ask a question. Furthermore, I have on numerous occasions had them argue with me to go against the medical advice from both doctors and medical advice manufacturers. Last time going as far as claiming that a scanner does not emit electromagnetic radiation.

meatmanek 7mo ago

I want to know more about the mechanism of damage to a spinal implant from (what I assume is) a millimeter-wave scanner. I would expect millimeter waves to not penetrate very deeply -- Wikipedia says "typically less than 1 mm" (their citation for that is behind a paywall though.) Seems like an implant should be more than 1mm below the surface.

Balgair 7mo ago
Like the top of your skull, the boney bits on your spine can be less than a mm from the air. Especially if you're a woman or are elderly or are quite sick and recovering. Many things can affect skin thickness. Also, that depth is probably the FWHM of the decay curve, so it is reaching a bit deeper but at lower amplitudes. Also the scanner has some quirks of its own, so who knows really what the exact specifics of that particular scanner are on that day.

Trasmatta 7mo ago

I have type 1 diabetes and have a CGM and insulin pump on me at all times. The manufacturers say you shouldn't take them through the scanners, but me and every diabetic I know has never experienced any issues with the devices, so most of us just go through the scanner and then have to be patted down anyway because it picks up the device. I dread it every time, because when I've tried to inform TSA agents ahead of time about my medical devices (which all the signs tell you to do!) they either ignore me or just tell me to go through. And then when I don't mention it, I frequently get berated on the other side, while they do the swab test for explosives.

SoftTalker 7mo ago

I'm not a particular fan of the TSA but when you work with the public at that scale, stuff happens. It gets a bit tiresome to read articles like this that imply it's normal and frequent. It doesn't seem like it's worthy of discussion on HN: it's neither intellectually interesting nor a new phenomenon. I've never had a single issue with the TSA. I went through a checkpoint when I had a shoulder injury and could not raise my arms above my head for the backscatter machine. I explained this and I was politely escorted through the alternate scan/metal detector. My experience is one data point, doesn't mean much by itself, nor does the experience of the unfortunate person in this story.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

T3RMINATED 7mo ago

Abolish the TSA

ChrisMarshallNY 7mo ago

Whenever these situations come up, the solution is always "more train." I suspect "MOAR PAIN" would have a better outcome. People check out, during training; especially the type of training that is designed to shield the organization from lawsuits, and are given by uninspired, bored speakers. Some high-profile object lessons are more likely to have an effect.

idle_zealot 7mo ago

There's no consistency in procedure from TSA agents. They're undertrained, unaccountable, and some combination of bored, disinterested, and high on petty authority. I don't think any amount of training or official guidance could improve the situation, though. The essential problem is the authority plus unaccountability or oversight. That will always go poorly for anyone subjected to that authority sooner or later.

gensym 7mo ago
Perhaps once AI destroys all the livelihoods of educated and disciplined white collar workers, it'll be easier for the TSA to find people who can follow basic instructions and show a normal amount of empathy.
- readthenotes1 7mo ago
  And then the job will drive that empathy right out of them.
- bichiliad 7mo ago
  I think it's the job, not the person. All sorts of people work at the TSA; clearly it's endemic to the TSA, not to the people who work there.
  - MBCook 7mo ago
    You have to deal with pissed people all day who don’t listen at all. And if you make the tiniest mistake you could be the person who failed to stop the next 9/11. Doing the same three or four things screening people all day long has got to be mind numbingly boring. Unless you’re at an airport that isn’t constantly busy where instead you get to stand around doing nothing, which can be worse. It honestly sounds like a terrible job to have. Aren’t they paid pretty bad too? I can see why a lot of people would want to move out of it, leaving only those who are stuck or like the power. None of this is excuse what happened in the article.
    - 7mo ago

proee 7mo ago

I brought a $14k oscilloscope through TSA once. They flagged the unit and proceeded to inspect it, lifting it by the edges of the plastic front cover and trying to remove it while held in mid-air. I kind of freaked out and said "stop" because the oscilloscope was about to take a free-fall. They were not happy that I spoke up, but luckily it averted a crisis.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

rngfnby 7mo ago

Atlanta TSA are the absolute worst. I've lived in Atlanta for a while and used ATL quite a bit. They're easily the most aggressive, arrogant, stupid, obnoxious and self-righteous of all the TSA Ive used. Ive even had an altercation with them that ended up having to file a complaint (never heard back) and got to speak to a manager only because I started, loudly, whistling the anthem.

dogemaster2025 7mo ago

[flagged]

dogemaster2025 7mo ago
[flagged]