You can't.
I didn't.
BTW, If you look at who I am replying to for starters, You would unknot your frigging skivvies and take a nature break.
In between "Private Reply" and "View Replies" at the bottom of the post, is the number of the post I was replying to. Click on that number and you will be able to read the post of Vinnie's I was replying to.
My post being right after your comments (which I still haven't read, because I am replying to your rant) just means that I posted that comment right after you posted yours, timewise, It only means I am replying to you if I am, in which case I will direct my remarks to you so there is no misunderstanding.
As for your post to me:
Or is your view that common sense requires behaving in a manner that does not comport with common sense on the grounds that no one else has any common sense?
When stupid people jump to ridiculous conclusions based on faulty assumptions, and it appears that 93 out of 100 people will (according to the study), it might be a worthy consideration.
Chances are most people would pick up the real bomb to try to disable the TV/movie model.
Now, even knowing what you do, would you walk up to the TSA guy wearing something that looked like a bomb prop from a movie set? Would you consider flirting with the potentially lethal (for you in the above circumstances) stupidity of the general public a wise thing to do?
If not, you may have common sense.
I watch less than 1 hour of TV a week, work on oil rigs, and I have a nephew in EOD, A father in law who did the same in WWII, a childhood friend who was a SEAL, and have handled a few things that go boom in a civillian context, between construction and the oil patch.
I have read some of the military manuals, just out of curiosity.
My nephew and I had a good laugh over the typical TV/Movie 'blue wire/green wire' scenario because we both knew the usual procedure was to either blow the darned thing up in place or move it somewhere else and blow it up, while containing/redirecting the blast effects as well as possible.
But enough about me.
The student in the article, at the top of all this, though, pulled a stupid stunt, which upset people whose job it is to get upset.
If someone could just walk through wearing something which looked like a TV/Hollywood explosive device, chances are the guys named Abdul and Mohammed and such would be lined up around the block at Radio Shack.
Well, we have two problems to address. First, was it a stunt? Everyone has leaped to that conclusion, except a few of us. Since you know so much about high explosives, tell me, if you were going to wire up a surreptitious device would you put LEDs on it and hang them outside your shirt so that everyone could see that you had a vest with flashing LEDs? What, in your view, would be the purpose of flashing LEDs in a terrorist device?
Second, it is not the job of security people to get upset. Their job is, well, er, uh, goodness gracious, this is going to come as a real shock, to provide security.
Providing security means stopping genuine threats, and letting those who are not a threat go on their way. It is emotionless. Getting upset is never a part of good security. The real problem is that too many of these jobs are held by egomaniacs who work on emotions and get upset when folks do something they believe challenges their authority rather than just dealing with their jobs.
And the reason that they are despised is because they don't behave professionally.