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...

[HiTech RedNeck]

You of all people should whine about "falsely" when suggesting that certain ones are utterly "impotent" without guns when they aver that guns would certainly make their mission far easier.

[B4Ranch]

>>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.<<

Before I even thought of posting a reply, I checked your profile page to see if there was any history there that would show complete ignorance about commercial airliners.

The Boeing 707 can withstand the sudden removal of SEVEN WINDOWS before the air masks (de-presurization) will drop from the ceiling. These windows can be together, on one side of the fuselage or spread out.
de-presurization
Impossible you say.

The pumps that supply the oxygen to the passenger section are overbuilt to exceed normal demand BY REGULATION as are the presurization/oxygen systems of every commercial airliner.

Did you know that commercial airliners leak from many place throughout the fuselage?

Yes, the door have gaskets but after a few months they are not airtight. The lavatories are another great place for leaks.

By overbuilding the presurization/oxygen systems this make sure that all the odors from the lavatory do not come back into the passenger section.

How many bullets laid side by side would it take to fill the space of seven windows?

I suggest, either do some studying or don't post so strenuously about subject which you are not qualified.

[Mulder]

Allowing everyone to carry a weapon would NOT reduce terrotists threat to aircraft. It would increase the threat.

Sounds just like Sarah Brady's arguement against CCW.

[Mulder]

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

So you are against Air Marshalls or other feds carrying?

[Revolting cat!]

For some mysterious reasons, it appears that the airport screeners didn't have to pry any of those guns from the "dead, cold hands" of those big mouth sissies!

[Poohbah]

Comes to mind a report from Fallujah where the Marine is just amazed how stupid the tactics of the terrs are. They ARE clever enough to prey on sheeple. So -- don't be a sheeple.

Those aren't the guys hijacking airplanes, dumb****.

[Mulder]

Wandering around with a hollowed out gun in it - and JUST FORGOT ABOUT IT?

She's 79, it's very possible she forgot she had it in there.

Also, consider that flying general involves a significant amount of stress, especially since when many people fly it is because someone in their family is dead or dying; or their own health is in serious jeopardy.

Having said that, maybe she is lying, maybe not. Big deal. She is under no moral or even legal obligation to 'fess up' in this situation, and her "I forgot" defense will be more effective (sadly) than "it's my Right as an American citizen".

Finally, any government that tries to lock up a 79 year-old granny, lacking criminal intent, for a non-violent "crime" is totally illegitimate and no better than any of the regimes that American soldiers have died fighting over the years.

[Poohbah]

So you are against Air Marshalls or other feds carrying?

I dunno about stm, but I most assuredly am.

[Poohbah]

In a free country I'd choose the airline that had the best PPD's, the best bullet proof partition protecting my pilots, and included a pass to the airport shooting range with every ticket purchase. Shooting proficiency awards recieved by the staff and frequent fliers, would be a good incentive to fly the friendly and safe skies, of airline x.

And then the terrorists buy tickets on that airline. Congratulations, you have a firefight at FL410.

The terrorists lather, rinse, and repeat.

How long would that airline stay in business?

[Poohbah]

This is why I approach the topic from the assumption that the badguys will get on armed. If that is preventable (I have yet to see it) it might change my stance.

With a proper screening protocol, they won't. When was the last time you heard of someone bringing a gun onto an El Al flight?

The problem is that the "guns" used in the test cases are NOT guns. They are not a couple pounds of ferrous metal. They are intended to see if the crews can detect the infamous (and nonexistent) "plastic guns" that Sarah Brady was soiling her Depends over back in the late 1980s.

When the guy testing the screener screwed up and stuck a REAL gun into the bag, it got caught immediately...and the tester was searched, and they found the "test gun" in his holster.

[HiTech RedNeck]

The box cutter offensive took 5 years to develop, and would have instantly failed if the sheeple had grasped the pan-murderous intent of the hijackers. If the ship is going down with you, you will stop at nothing to head that off.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Revealing your sheeplehood in wolf's clothing, if even well screened air marshals and NOBODY else as much as humanly possible would be allowed guns on aircraft in your world. You would darken your Depends over the potential of an air marshal being an undercover terrorist. Always seeing the dark cloud in the silver lining.

[Poohbah]

Revealing your sheeplehood in wolf's clothing, if even well screened air marshals and NOBODY else as much as humanly possible would be allowed guns on aircraft in your world.

Reread what I wrote. I don't want ANY guns in the passenger cabin; guns favor the few and organized, where an unarmed brawl favors the side with the biggest numbers.

You would darken your Depends over the potential of an air marshal being an undercover terrorist.

That's not my worry. My worry is that an air marhsal would be a ready source of a gun for a sufficiently ruthless terrorist.

I just think it's a tad unrealistic to expect an air marshal to be both Wyatt Earp AND Bruce Lee.

[HiTech RedNeck]

That's not my worry. My worry is that an air marhsal would be a ready source of a gun for a sufficiently ruthless terrorist.

Why don't you just curl up in your bed and voluntarily starve to death. It would make as much sense as your chicken littlism.

[Poohbah]

Okay, I understand that you're not able to...ahem...perform without a gun, but those of us who enjoy doing a little old-fashioned a$$-whuppin' will do just fine without you.

[Mulder]

I dunno about stm, but I most assuredly am.

Well, at least you are consistent.

When you get to the truth with many posters around here, there objection really isn't to guns, rather it's to anyone other than agent of the state having one.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I could possibly overwhelm a robber sans gun, but the gun would make it much easier. Your continued raising of this straw man is high comedy.

[Mulder]

I suggest, either do some studying or don't post so strenuously about subject which you are not qualified.

You're casting your pearls before swine.

No matter how many times that myth has been refuted, some folks here are either unwilling or unable to deprogram their mind from what they saw on a TV show once.

[B4Ranch]

I hope it was an exciting show for them.

[Mulder]

The terrorists lather, rinse, and repeat.

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

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?