Interesting thread on CNN

These data clearly show just how big the problem of people trying to carry knives on airplanes really is: minuscule.

Many of the airports listed don't even have a line item for knives. I suppose in those cases that any knives that were found fall under the "Any Other Weapon" category. Notice how many of the airports have more problems with people bringing explosives aboard than knives.

The other interesting thing is the statistics on tear gas and OC sprays. These are probably the most common weapon out there. Heck, you see the stuff hanging next to the breath mints between the National Enquirer and the horoscope magizines in the supermarket checkout lanes. And yet in these statistics, which span nine years, many of our top 25 airports report only a few cases of it. NY La Guardia, however, stands out with 120 incidents. Apparently New Yorkers like that stuff a lot... or is it just that the screeners at La Guardia have been told to be stricter on it?

That's the really interesting thing about these statistics. Maybe New Yorkers do like chemical sprays. But then why does New York JFK report only six incidents in the same nine years. But, JFK reports 383 firearms while La Guardia reports only 62 in the same period.

This just speaks to extreme inconsistency in airport security. Amazing.
 
"News Flash! News Flash! News Flash! News Flash! News Flash!

We here at [insert name of favorite news group here] have a ground breaking story to report to you folks tonight. After exhaustive tests we have found out that terrorists, not box cutters, nail clippers, and any other knife, are the REAL danger! Yes, we are as surprised as you. it turns out that knives don't jump out and slash pilots to death, but rather it takes a human with the intent to do bodily harm to an innocent person to pick up and manipulate knives, box cutters, and the like for evil purposes. We at [insert name of favorite news group here] are recommending that airports, Sea World, and all governments take knives off of the "dangerous and must stay banned' list, and instead place terrorists at the top of said list.

Thank-you, and good night."


I'm waiting to hear the above any day! ;)
 
I think we should try to identify the terrorists before they even enter the airport. My suggestion, "Your attention please: The white zone is for loading and unloading only. No unattended cars in the white zone. The red zone is for car bombs. No non-exploding vehicles in the red zone, please. The blue zone is for hijackers. All hijackers should use the blue parking zone."

If we color-code things, maybe the security screeners could figure it out.
 
Interesting facts....by my math that is over 300 rifles (long, big, firearm) in a 10 year period. How could this happen?????????? That seems very high stats. I wonder if some of these incidents were not mix up's by well intioned people who didn't follow air port protocall and were thrown into the mix. Either that, or I think I'll drive to the next destination.
 
"Your attention please: The Clean Indoor Air Act prohibits smoking and the use of chemical and biological weapons inside the terminal building except in designated areas. Smoking areas are available between the B and C concourses and near baggage claim carousel number five. The designated chemical and biological weapons lounge is on the C concourse between gates C23 and C25. Thank you for your cooperation."

We should also make periodic announcements like, "Paging: Mr. Bin Lauden, Osama Bin Lauden please answer a white courtesy phone for an important message." You never know. It just might work. It's more likely to catch him than our current screening processes.
 
Here's a thought on the rifles: maybe these are from the hired folks that test the efficency of the security measures. It would not surprise me if they were using the biggest dam.n gun they could squeeze into a duffle bag so even the biggest idiot they have manning the detectors would catch them. Then they could say "See! Our statistics show we're doing a good job! Let's hear it for us!"

Just a thought.

-Al-
 
Dallas takes the lead in attempts to carry on a handgun. I fly out of DFW! GREAT!!!
 
I put SeaWorld on my banned list! They don't want knives, then I don't want to give them my money. Besides, those killer whales out-weigh me... I need an equalizer. Then they can use it as a toothpick after they eat me.

Stogie
and I just resigned from "Save the Whales" :D
 
These stats are interesting to look at and ponder, but unless there is reliable information on HOW they were collected, with WHAT definitions of weapons, and if all airports used the SAME definitions, etc., they are largely useless.

Something tells me these are just for "show" and are not being used in any intelligent fashion to improve ANYTHING.

And yes, I bet federal testers' dummy weapons are included in these stats.

The fact that defensive sprays are horribly underrepresented here is enough to cast enormous doubt on any relationship to reality these stats might possess. In self-defense class, we usually hear several "airport pepper spray confiscation" stories in a year.

There's also the possibility that any REAL stats regarding airport security would never be given out, due to criminals' misuse of such info, although the "changing times" may render old info obsolete.

Still amazingly disgusted,

Karl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top