J.D. Tuccille Talks Bogus TSA Spidey Senses and Security Theater on RT
There's no evidence that the Transportation Security Administration's Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques program actually works, the Government Accountability Office reported last week—for the third time. The GAO asked, given the lack of scientific support for the approach, why the TSA is deploying thousands of behavior detection officers, at a cost of $200 million dollars per year, to exercise their spidey senses in airport terminals.
Just days later, independent security researcher Evan Booth, of Terminal Cornucopia, demonstrated that you can build a grenade with materials purchased at the airport after you pass through the TSA checkpoint. In the past, he's built incendiaries, crossbows, and other weapons on the same principle.
As you can imagine, this provided the basis for an interesting conversation about airport security with RT's Ameera David.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
He thinks this means we'll rethink our irrational security policy, but it probably means we will double down on the idiocy and ban food or something.
They'll ban all the items he uses in his videos from being sold in the airport.
Because I am such a patriot, I'm going to give our country the solution to transport safety for free. It's called the "slave ship" model. Passengers are stripped naked, boarded on to the plane, train, ship or what-have-you, forced to lie down next to each other while their arms and legs are shackled to the floor for the entire journey.
God bless America.
How can the charter airline companies thank you enough?
Fly charter! It's more expensive, but you can thumb your nose at the TSA twits!
You won't have them row?
Too much danger of revolt. Besides, unions.
There are some great jokes about the Teamsters here, but I'll be damned if I can think of them...
Rowing just increases fuel consumption on an airplane - the airlines would scream bloody murder at the increase in costs.
Do I get to choose which hot chick I lie down next to?
Choose? Oh, you rapscallion! Next you'll ask that they feed you on the journey as well!
Each position has two buckets, one's for slops and one's for food.
Which is which?
That's up to you.
The Gov't, the insurance companies and the RE industry; a threesome married to free shit:
"Backlash over changes in flood insurance"
People getting upset over having to pay closer to what the risk costs to build on a flood plain! Properties harder to sell!
Legislators who wrote the bill shocked to find "what's in it"!
http://www.sfgate.com/business.....988143.php
I could not bring myself to read it. I got as far as seeing Maxine Waters face. Maxine Waters face will ruin my sunday for fucks sake.
No amount of idiocy associated with her would surprise me.
I remember flying in the 70's, it was a true pleasure. The seats were roomy, the food wasnt toooooo bad, and everyone was pretty friendly and relaxed. Security was nearly non-existent.
That's because, prior to de-regulation, airlines had to compete on services offered since prices were fixed.
Look, it's real simple. All this verbiage and printiage is unnecessary.
Start with the assumption that if any actual terrorists had been caught, by any means, the TSA would be trumpeting this like nobody's business.
How many passengers fly every year? Suppose it's 100 million. That's 1 billion passengers since 9-11.
0 terrorists out of 1B passengers. *No* screening program has caught *any* terrorists. To claim that SPOT is effective is like the drunk whistling dixie to scare away the dragons. It must be effective since no one has seen any dragons around the whistling drunk.
Its simple - the mere existence of the SPOT program was enough to scare off the terrorists. By pointing out that SPOT is "ineffective" (government-speak for absolutely worthless and might possibly have actually been *detrimental*) *you've* made America less safe.
Naw, there are many other ineffective screening programs which have not yet been denounced as ineffective. The the non-existent terrorists will still be deterred by the yet undenounced ineffective programs.