Airport screeners find 75 guns per month

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | November 25, 2004 | Audrey Hudson

[neverdem]

---

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

---

Airport screeners find 75 guns per month

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published November 25, 2004

---

Traveling for the holidays? Have everything you need? Razor? Toothbrush? Handgun? Ammunition?

    Homeland Security officials say that even now, three years after the September 11 terrorist attacks prompted new security measures at airports, passengers continue to show up at the terminals carrying guns and bullets.

    Airport screeners find 2,000 bullets and 75 guns per month on passengers or in carry-on bags, said Mark Hatfield, spokesman for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). At 450 airports across the country, an average of two guns per day are discovered.

    "The numbers are going up," Mr. Hatfield said.

    Nearly every case is accidental -- hunters forget to take ammo out of coat pockets and sportsmen forget to take guns out of bags after target practice or a trip to the skeet range, he said.

    A 79-year-old woman was arrested Tuesday at Fort Lauderdale International Airport in Florida after a single-shot Colt Derringer and seven bullets were found in her tote bag.

    The woman said she had placed the gun in a hollowed-out book in the bag months ago and had forgotten about it. She faces a penalty of up to five years in prison.

    "That underscores the importance of the need to screen everyone," TSA spokeswoman Yolanda Clark said. "This continues to be a significant problem at checkpoints across the country."

    The National Rifle Association (NRA) is teaming up with the TSA on a public service campaign to remind its members to include guns and bullets in last-minute...

[FreedomCalls]

1. No.

2. Yes.

[Mulder]

What happened on 9/11 wasn't about boxcutters or knives or guns. Rather, it was about mindset.

For decades, the media, the police, and the politicians, have been telling the American people not to fight back against crime. They have been telling us to simply call 911 and to not resist. In most states, they have even made it a criminal act to defend your own property.

What happened on 9/11 was an embarassment to America. 20 turds massacred over 3000 Americans. I can think of no other event in American history with such a lopsided result for us (not even Pearl Harbor).

Perhaps the only thing more embarassing, has been the reaction of a supposedly-free people, that have chosen the appearance of safety over Freedom.

[upchuck]

More than 15 million prohibited items, including more than 2,000 guns, have been confiscated from passengers since the TSA took over screening responsibility in February 2002.

Wonder where they store that stuff since I don't believe they give it back.

[Poohbah]

You're underlying assumption is that there are dozens of terrorists just waiting to hijack planes once the "no guns" edict is lifted.

No, I am assuming that the enemy is smart and flexible.

Since the latter is not likely to occur in my lifetime, does this mean the terrorists are simply stupid waiting for something that will never happen (I mean, they could go after other soft targets, right?), or is your underlying premise wrong?

No, your premise is wrong. My premise is that the enemy is flexible. If the rules were suddenly changed in a way that would give terrorists wide-open opportunity to carry guns onto airplanes, then the terrorists would seek to use it to their advantage. A half-dozen fedayeen could make very good use of this concept--frankly, they would be likely to win any firefight that broke out.

Actually, I oppose governmental edict in this matter; the market (i.e., insurance companies and stockholders) would enforce it far more ruthlessly. Any airline that allowed unlimited carry would discover that they would need to self-insure, because no insurance company would insure them. The cost of self-insuring would, in short order, drive ticket prices to a point where nobody would buy a ticket. In turn, the stockholders would demand that the policy be revoked.

[gc4nra]

Please reread my post, I'm on your side!

[TERMINATTOR]

A heck of a lot longer than your Sheeple Airlines, which would be the choice of terrorists. I wouldn't mind the lot of you going down in flames, I just hope the Air Force shoots you down before anyone gets hurt.

[HiTech RedNeck]

The righteous can be smart and flexible. The wicked can only be cunning and devious.

[Poohbah]

A heck of a lot longer than your Sheeple Airlines, which would be the choice of terrorists.

How so? My airline would profile, and terrorists would be shot dead during pre-boarding. You, on the other hand, would be inviting a firefight on every flight.

Believe it or not, most people will not ride an airplane where a firefight is the expected outcome of the flight, and several DOZEN people are dead each week. Their insurance will be cancelled...as will the airline's.

I wouldn't mind the lot of you going down in flames, I just hope the Air Force shoots you down before anyone gets hurt.

The only people who would fly your airline would be the terrorists.

Why is it that the people who are the loudest advocates of the 2nd Amendment are the last people any sane person would trust with a firearm?

[Poohbah]

The righteous can be smart and flexible. The wicked can only be cunning and devious.

Intelligence and morality are not synonymous.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Fair enough challenge: let the market, not the Sheepleherders, sort it out with each airline exercising its private property rights. The takings for Yeehaw Airlines would be much better than you think, as your kind of chicken littlism is in the vast minority among gunslingers.

[B4Ranch]

My reply was primarily for stm. The author of

>>. The first round to penetrate the fuselage would probably cause an explosive decompression that would not only suck people out the hole, it could cause enough damage to bring about catastrophic failure of the fuselage.<<

>>Guns on an airplane are a very bad idea, regardless of who is holding them.<<

[B4Ranch]

There are large numbers of passengers that are concerned about travelling in an aircraft with armed 'Sky Marshals' with the fear that any stray shooting could bring the aircraft down or cause catastrophic failure.

Below is intelligence gathered from specific independent safety tests conducted by the Australian Protection & Intelligence Agency before positioning their ANSS (Australian National Security Service) ASA (Aircraft Security Agents) on aircraft.

1) Sky Marshals (ASA's) are highly trained individuals. They are highly trained in weapons disarming and CEOF (Close Environment & Obstruction Firing). During training, ASA's have fired upon motion targets the size of an 80kg male, using imitation passengers obscuring their view and simulated turbulence. On only 2% of occasions, the targets where struck outside the venture markings of the motion targets. This is highly successful.

2) The Firearms and Ammunitions of an ASA are of a low velocity to where the risk of the projectile (bullet) piecing the aircraft fuselage is extremely unlikely. During testing in a pressurised unit, two projectiles fired into an aluminium area of 10mm apart on a test area did not pierce the structure.

3) Should a Specialist Sky Marshall during an event ever miss the target and a bullet actually does happen to pierce the fuselage, all you will notice is a slight whistling sound coming from the hole. In fact, if a bullet breaks out a passenger window, the cabin outflow valve will go to a full closed position allowing the pressurisation system to compensate for the loss of pressure. In the meantime, the pilots would have already started a descent to a lower altitude.

4) There has never been a reported crash due to 'Rapid Decompression' on a commercial aircraft from a bullet hole or similar. Aircraft have crashed due to 'Explosive Decompression', which the 'explosive' action causes significant decompression or significant structural damage, causing an aircraft to become extremely hard to control although not impossible to land (dependent on the level of damage).

Aircraft today are far safer than they have ever been due to modern enhancements to their structure and equipment technology. These improvements combined with highly trained Security personnel on board (either Government or Private); make the aircraft ultimately a lot safer at present, than they have ever been in the past.

http://www.anss.com.au/Myths-about-Sky-Marshals.htm

I hope this article soothes the minds of those who think an aircraft would explode from the loss of a window.

[BlackbirdSST]

I hope this article soothes the minds of those who think an aircraft would explode from the loss of a window.

Only a snowballs chance! Hollywoods "realism" will trump common sense and a boatload of fact every time. Blackbird.

[Poohbah]

The takings for Yeehaw Airlines would be much better than you think, as your kind of chicken littlism is in the vast minority among gunslingers.

Uh-huh. Yeehaw Airlines would have to self-insure because no insurance carrier would cover them, especially after the first shootout. To be able to self-insure, Yeehaw Airlines would be forced to charge a great deal more money than their competitors. The market of "gunslingers" willing to fork out that much money is not large enough to sustain Yeehaw Airlines' business plan. And people who do NOT carry on a regular basis will not ride the airplane, either, after the first shootout.

[Apogee]

That is the real problem behind the airline's difficulties. All the planes dropped that day were at what? 20% capacity?
It always struck me as odd that they were touting 9/11 as the reason for their problems when they weren't keeping enough passengers in the air to begin with. Cui bono? In the end, they profited with all the government money spent to bail them out, methinks.

[js1138]

I will never forgive Islam for depriving me of my keychain Swiss Army knife.

[gc4nra]

I agree. As a matter of fact I was one of the first to site the Aloha Airlines "convertable" 737!

[El Gato]

Airport screeners find 2,000 bullets

Do they melt them down? What are folks doing with bullets in their pockets or bags? Where they planing on reloading a few rounds on the flight or when they got to their destination?

Oh, (hopefully) they mean cartridges. Never mind. :)

[El Gato]

Terrorists know who bad guys are; citizenry doesn't, causing multiple blue-on-blue engagements.

Could happen, although not so terribly likely. It could happen that an air Marshall would shoot the wrong person as well. AFAIK, that hasn't happened yet either. Is that worse than letting the terrorists crash the aircraft into a building and killing thousands?

Still, small steps would be OK as well. Implement the armed pilots law in a manner to encourage pilots and other aircrew to become armed, rather than to discourage them.

[El Gato]

And -- talk about holes in the fuselage -- a retired airline captain told me that the outlet pipe may be 15 inches in diameter

A retired KC-10 crew chief (KC-10 is just a DC-10 with fuel tanks in the lower lobe and a refueling boom system) told me that you could easily watch the terrain go by merely by looking out the partially open cabin pressure regulation valve.

A 15" diameter "pipe" would have about the same area as 1111 .45 caliber bullets.