all 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

In Amsterdam, I just had to put my feet (with shoes on) through a machine that took a second or two

no need to take off the shoe

Then I was given a little question and answer, the Danish (*I'm an idiot Dutch... y'all look the same to me anyway) officer looked me up and down and then let me board the plane. I felt much more sure that they were being diligent and actually screening people, unlike TSA that always feels like security theater.

Especially when they decide they need to pat you down and then actually move your dick "to be sure I wasn't hiding anything"

Like thanks for thinking my dick is so big I am actually hiding something but come on... you just wanted to get a feel of my cock Mr TSA

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    In Düsseldorf, after the full body scan and scan of my bags, I still had to take of my shoes, put them in a box, they scanned said box with shoes and after as I was putting on my shoes, using the metal seat to lift my feet, they complained about that because people sit there. Which is a fair point, but holy shit was I pissed off at the time. I hate that airport.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Annoying part about the kabuki theatre that is TSA is that they are inconsistent airport to airport. Shoes gotta come off, shoes can stay on. Laptop by itself in a bin, or with other things in a bin. Other electronics (e-reader, battery pack, etc.) in a bin, or in your carry on. But if you make the wrong choice they will let you know… loudly.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    Inconsistent within the same airport.

    One time the line split into two, with announcers for each line shouting different instructions. One had you take all electronics out of bags, the other didn't. One lines instructions included taking your shoes off, the other didn't. The line without shoes off instruction had agents insulting people for taking their shoes off for not listening to instructions. 10M away there is an agent shouting at people to take your shoes off.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Almost like security isn't the point...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    It isn't wholely the point. It's also a massive jobs programs.

    But specifically for not knowing what to expect is a feature not a bug.

    If you don't know the exact procedure every time - then you can't plan for every countermeasure. You cannot plan 100% when the variables are always changing.

    It also distracts any would-be bomber because they need to waste attention on following whatever rules they decided apply today only.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I just had this experience the other day. Flying SFO to BOS and it was like the security people didn't even care. Leave everything in your bags, leave your shoes on, leave your belt on. The only thing they asked was empty your pockets, and it could all go in one bin. I thought that finally TSA was getting a bit better about not being such pricks about every little thing.

    And then on my return flight, I got pulled out of the security line three times. Once for a mistake printed on my boarding pass (not my fault, but I had to get it corrected at the service kiosk anyway), once for my CPAP machine that I left in my carry on bag (which is exactly how I did it in SFO and they didn't give a shit), and once a bottle of liquid that was 8.5oz (limit is 8.4oz), so they made me pour out 0.1oz of fucking liquid.

    They yelled at me all three times and said that I should know the rules by now, but none of those things came up during my first flight. The rules change literally every time I fly somewhere, so there's no point in memorizing them anymore. There are the "hard" rules which are sometimes not enforced and then there are the "soft" rules that seem to vary from airport to airport, or even individual TSA agents having a bad day or going on a power trip or something. I hate it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    they are inconsistent airport to airport

    Forget TSA, international travel with my baby for the first time, anxiety problems, little time between connections, laptop and pram fucking freaked me the fuck out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And if it’s busy and you’re in hurry say goodbye to your small electronics in the bin

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Had TSA take me aside and X-ray my laptop for a good 20 minutes last time I flew.

    To be fair, the laptop had a sticker that insinuated drug use, but it's not like I had hidden a thousand doses of Mega LSD under the SSD (which it really looked like they were scanning for).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Years ago, my now deceased grandfather and uncle were flying together. My grandfather had a full ass pair of scissors in his fanny pack, because he was a practical man and having scissors on your person at all times is useful.

    My uncle scanned the row of x-ray machines, and picked the line with the TSA agent that was inspecting booties closer than the x-ray screen.

    My grandpa successfully made the trip with his scissors.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can bring scissors on a plane.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That reminds me of when the Los Angeles Clippers (an NBA team, originally from San Diego, named after the famous clipper ships) had a mascot named "Scissors". Very popular mascot up until they started using him to promote exercise programs for children, including the now-infamous "Run With Scissors".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    The addition of the TSA logo in this meme 🤌

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Casual reminder: Materials such as magnesium or PETN are perfect for smuggling through airport security. Reason being, they only show up as an anorganic material in the x-ray thanks to their density. They lack any sort of smell that dogs could detect as well. Israel and Russia have used both of these successfully for terrorist attacks in the past, all of the explosives have been smuggled successfully through the security theater. Israel sent pagers with 2g of PETN in the batteries to Hezbollah and Russia wanted to get a magnesium explosive onto an DHL aeroplane to make it detonate during flight.

    In both of these cases, the airport "security" did absolutely nothing to stop this. Better empty your bags everyone, because you are the security risk. Once you start allowing this type of nonsense, it will stick around forever.

    Edit: I should mention, while the explosives for the Russian terrorist attack successfully got through airport security, because of a delay in loading the aeroplane, it never got on it and instead detonated in the container on the ground, luckily.

    And also, if someone wants to come at me with some safety-security nonsense, this is all public knowledge. This has happened factually.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    TSA is moving away from ion mobility detection to mass spec detection. Mass specs are great at detecting it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Wouldn't ms require actual mass of material? Volatiles, sure, but how many magnesium ions do we have free floating that doesn't have an organic source?

    Also ms is expensive af. Tax dollars folks.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    I'm doubtful that this would solve anything, because for example in the case of Israel, the explosives went through multiple independent security theatres, and the PETN still successfully arrived at the victims. Like, if it happens once, okay, maybe it's a fluke, but if it happens multiple times throughout the supply chain and every single time it's A-okay, that's a problem. Israel heavily relied on regular commercial transport for their bombs. There were countless instances where they could have been stopped, but they weren't. And that is a worrying signal.

    And even if all explosives would be detected with perfect accuracy, from now on, it still would be vulnerable to other points of attack. Just pay off a throwaway goon squad, let them smuggle ceramic weapons in their trousers into an aeroplane, and there you go. And I do believe Mossad and the FSB can come up with better ideas than that. IMO, there needs to be a more effective alternative, than this security theater nonsense.

    Edit: And the reason why I'm against it is not only because it has been disproven so many times that it's impossible to enumerate. It's also the principle of "guilty until proven innocent", that is slowly but surely infesting our society.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    I had an online disagreement in the TSA subreddit about how moronic taking shoes off was. Those fascist pawns believe that shoe bomber reaction for years was justifiable.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago*

    Took two flights this last week and was made to take my shoes off for both.

    I opt out if the millimetre wave scanner though, so they basically just make it an additional thing for not toeing the line.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    This is proof that rare dramatic instances are indeed, rare. And people have become hypervigilant.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Wait what? You guys had to take your shoes off? Never encountered that even though I already reached my plane limit for my life

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 36 comments in c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 27 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    TSA has never made travel safer.

    It's always been a jobs program.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Security theater to assuage the public's (scared, rich, white people) fears after hyping up the threat of foreign terrorism.

    Essentially, the establishment made a booboo and hurt the airline industry's bottom line in their efforts to destabilize the Middle East. So, they devised a sideshow circus to get people flying again.

    It isn't even about jobs. They never gave a shit about jobs. It's always about the money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Yes because clearly people don't travel to countries with darker skinned people or simply because despite them not affording it their business sent them on a trip.

    You know, you don't have to work in the rich white people schtick into every conversation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, I don't have to but, considering the topic, it was relevant to the situation.

    TSA exists the way it does in the USA specifically to assuage the fears of rich white people who travel for pleasure and getting them to fly again after the events of 9/11 which had a significant impact on the airline industry, seeing a significant decline in passengers, thus a decline in industry revenue.

    You also don't have to keep your head in the sand about the way the world works with every conversation you find yourself in.

    Now, piss off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    my dude did you not speak to any person of Arab descent between 2001 and 2021? You couldn't even be Sikh without getting accused of being an Islamic terrorist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • The point being- were there no rich black men taking flights? Rich women? or did they somehow not have to fear terrorist attacks on planes?

    There was no point in inserting that and it's not only not true but also prejudiced assuming of course there could only be rich white men taking flights. Certainly couldn't be minorities taking flights right?

    It was stupid to insert, out of place, and deserved to be called out.

    Has nothing to do with the profiling done on Arab/Sikh/etc. people done by TSA.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago*

    The inconsistency is the worst but, at least outside America, most customs teams are polite and informative about what is required.

    When I travelled to the US, they were constantly annoyed that you didn't have their exact workflow memorized. That still happened when 2 machines, side by side, had different rules!

    Oh, and FYI, some places, like Amsterdam, have it FAR more efficient. No emptying bags, no 100ml limits. Bag and jackets go through the x-ray scanner, you go through the nudity scanner. You're done in less than 30 seconds.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    Security theatre.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I haven't traveled in 12 years, and I'm dreading my trip coming up in two weeks.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Are you bummed that you’re no longer going to see all those feet?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    TSA was security theater from the beginning. All those confiscated liquids, all thos stolen Apple electronics, all those confiscated tchotchkes, all those nude scans [shared between agens in the crew forums] for a safer vibe

    Though it did condition me away from air travel, and eventually from long-distance travel entirely.

  • source
  • [+] -13 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    What a dumb post. Or is this coming from the generation that never heard of "Richard shoe bomber" who is the reason some have to scan their shoes.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    I don't see how it wouldn't come up being scanned with the person the same if it come up going through the scanner. If my balls are to warm they set off the machine. Metal components in my shoes should detect as well, which you'd then have to take them off and have them scanned. It's probably much easier to work the electronics into a handheld game console, laptop, camera or other electronic devices and let it go through the machine and have them not be able to recognize it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (16 children)

    I'm sorry but I cannot understand what you're trying to say. The xray they use to scan your bags are not the same as the one you go through.

    In case you were unaware. "Richard shoe bomber" did not have metal or electronics in his shoe. He had simply put explosives in the sole of the shoe with a fuse attached.

    He was caught and restrained when he tried to light the fuse on the airplane.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    So what your saying is scanning the shoes would have made no difference?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    I'm saying the exact opposite.

    The scanner you put your bags, electronics, jackets, and shoes on. Are different than the scanner you walk through.

    That's why they ask you to put your shoes there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (13 children)

    They are... But not really. The machine will flag you if you are going through with your shoes on and something is off about them. The only thing that's different is it is easier to swab them if they think something may be off about them.

    Which if you went through the body scanner and they thought something was off, they are going to ask you to step aside and remove them to be swabbed.

    (Hence why anyone who applies for TSA pre check, could already keep their shoes on)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    The thing you walk through detects metal.

    The thing your personal items go through is an x-ray machine.

    The little metal detector wands are to find a more precise hit on what is setting the first metal detector off, in case you are trying to hide something on your person.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)

    My guy. The type of xray they scan your bags with are not what they scan you with.

    The reason they swab shoes is not to detect explosives. It's to detect drugs. If you take hard drugs, or swallow bags, they can often see traces of it in your sweat. And shoes are a fantastic source of sweat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    This is contrary to every article you can find online. They swab shoes, hands, laptops, etc. It's for glycerin and other substances found from explosives. They couldn't give a shit if you were on drugs. You can't get a DUI for being drunk/high and going through a TSA check point obviously. And they aren't arresting people for being on anything at the airport unless they are harassing someone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

    They 100% swab your feet and inside of the shoe for drugs.

    Hands and close personal items, such as wallets and electronics are for multiple reasons. Including explosives.

    The machine they put the swabs in can detect multiple substances, explosive compounds, precursors, drugs.

    They don't care if you got traces of drugs in your system. But they do care about you trying to smuggle it. That's why they test for Traces, externally and internally.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    Do you have a source for these claims? Because if you think businessmen never do coke and fly on planes within 24 hours that's crazy. They aren't getting pulled aside and tested and put on lists to see if they are trafficking cocaine.

    (Not to mention Adderall would likely trigger the same tests as meth, so that rules out meth trafficking as well. Because we are swabbing shoes remember)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    According to Australian Border control. They specifically swab feet and shoes, to test for traces of drugs on people they think look suspicious. Or people flying in from high risk areas.

    And the times where I've flown to the US from Amsterdam, Munich, Frankfurt, and Copenhagen. I was always put in a room where they swabbed my stuff, hands, feet, phone, laptop (at the gate). And I asked them why and what they're looking for. They gave me the answer that they are mostly looking for drugs.

    As drug smuggling is something they deal with every. Single. Day. where as people trying to board with explosives is extreamly rare.

    I did not say they care if you have drugs in your system. I specifically said the opposite.

    They just want to make sure you're not carrying drugs on you. Those who have drugs in their system, are far more likely to smuggle drugs than those who don't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Ah, I guess they'll need to stop flights coming in from the U.S. then, because DHS removed the shoe requirement from the TSA check points this month, which is what I presume was the inspiration for this post.

    (Or check them when they get there rather)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Regardless, someone did try to blow up a plane with explosives hidden in their shoe. It's a very well documented incident.

    After that incident. Security was stepped up globally, we had to start putting shoes to be xrayed, and we never saw a single case of anyone trying to smuggle explosives on board in their shoe ever again.

    If it's removed completely, it's because they have other methods that make it obsolete.

    Aviation rarely make the same mistake twice (Boeing goes hold my beer).

    When I was a kid, I got to step inside the cockpit and say hello to the pilots and look at all the instruments, mid flight. After my grandmother asked if that was ok. Fat chance of that ever happening again after 9-11

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Yeah the method was the newer scanners they are using. Most of them are like this:

    https://mdtsecurity.cc/solutions-products/l3-security-detection-systems/provision2/

    It does a 360 degree scan of you like a CT machine (but using mm waves, instead of X-rays and such)

    Automatic Target Detection (ATD)

    Quickly screens passengers for a broad variety of aviation targets both metallic and non-metallic: weapons, standard and home-made explosives (sheet and bulk), liquids, gels, plastics, powders, metals, ceramics, and other objects

    And unless I keep my legs spread while waiting in line, it nearly always triggers my groin because to much warmth. So they do a nice personal check with their hands just in case feeling the creases (Has happened to me 3 times out of 5) I run hotter than most people though

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah I've seen those. I think.... I know I've seen what looks like that. But if the technology inside is updated I can't say I know. Never had a problem with my balls being too warm in them. And I can't recall ever having my shoes on inside. Always had to put them aside. But that could easily just be airport policy at the time.

    Anyhow... what irked me was the post acting like scanning shoes was some fake phony security scam. Almost every single airline and airport policy is there for a reason.

    E.g. after the Lockerby tragedy. Airlines had to make sure that every single bag has a passenger that is on board the plane. As someone had checked in a bag with explosives, and then never boarded himself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    That's what changed here, is you can wear the shoes into these machines now basically. Because they know the machines are already scanning for w.e, and it is coming up on their screens that they are reviewing, so the only question for them was does an organic foot in the shoe cause any interference, which I presume it did not.

    That and if you applied for TSA pre check.. you could skip taking your shoes off. And that started in 2013. So if you could pass a basic background check before you got to the airport, they allowed you to bypass it. Which made people wonder .. well why is anyone doing it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So, this happened one time. Is that it?

    Literally one example and I'm supposed to live in fear of a copycat for the rest of eternity?

    Fuck no.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments