Skies Safer Than Ever After TSA Prevents Passenger From Boarding Flight With Cartoonish Novelty 'Bomb'
from the I-don't-want-to-say-they're-morons-but...-they're-morons dept
The skies are now that much safer [uses finger and thumb to approximate appropriately small amount] thanks to the super-serious safety efforts of the TSA. (via Amy Alkon)
Ever vigilant, intellectually adept, and multi-talented (seeing as how they can spot stuff to steal even as they have their hands down your pants), they discovered the above pictured Big Scary Terroristy Thing at Mitchell Airport in Milwaukee.How do we know the TSA managed to confiscate such a dangerous item? Because the TSA itself posted the photo above at its blog.
It is an “F Bomb Paperweight,” a piece of art handmade by Fred Conlon and selling for $45. Quoting from the F Bomb’s blurb:
It’s never easy dropping truth bombs in the office. But “f” bombs? Always explosive fun! Fred Conlon’s recycled steel sculpture lightens up desk-side chats and tough conversations with a delightfully abstract expletive appropriate for any situation. Handmade in Utah.
Each is one-of-a-kind and will vary slightly.
A black novelty bomb was detected in a carry-on bag at Milwaukee (MKE).Accompanying the photo of the clearly-not-a-real-bomb is the following statement:
We continue to find inert grenades and other weaponry on a weekly basis. Please keep in mind that if an item looks like a real bomb, grenade, mine, etc., it is prohibited. When these items are found at a checkpoint or in checked baggage, they can cause significant delays because the explosives detection professionals must resolve the alarm to determine the level of threat. Even if they are novelty items, you cannot bring them on a plane."Looks like a real bomb." Yeah, about that… This looks about as real as any bomb ordered by Wile E. Coyote from ACME Products. The "fuse" appears to be recycled power lines, something no one could actually light. The TSA's internet mouthpiece, Blogger Bob, has previously complained that bombs are hard to detect because they don't look like their animated counterparts.
“It’s not like they’re using a cartoonish bundle of dynamite with an alarm clock strapped to it,” Bob Burns of the TSA Blog Team posted on the agency’s Web site.He must be so relieved that someone actually walked into the Milwaukee airport with something cartoonish enough to be recognized as a bomb immediately by TSA staff -- which now looks more cartoonish than the "bomb" it confiscated. (Real bombs tend to go undetected...)
Presumably, the dangerous item will be forwarded to the TSA confiscation dumping grounds where it can be sold to the highest bidder and put back into circulation. Too dangerous to put on a plane but not too dangerous to put back in the public's hands, where it might be carried onto a bus, subway car or aerial tram. The TSA doesn't mind if you hijack/blow up another form of mass transportation… just don't take down an airplane.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: novelty bomb, searches, tsa
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Re: I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
The policy of "nothing that _looks_like_a_bomb_ is allowed" makes sensePutting that right next to their statement that real bombs don't look like cartoon bombs, seizing this cartoon bomb does not make much sense.
Since there was once a bomb that looked like shoes, should we stop allowing shoes? They make you take them off and they scan them (not sure how helpful that is), but they don't reject them from the plane.
What about suitcase bombs? Holy crap! People take suitcases onto planes all the time - better stop that.
Some things I can remember that terrorist attackes have used as bomb casings:
- Baby carriage
- Dolls / stuffed animals
- Laptops
- Pregnant women (heck, people for that matter)
If you stop allowing anything that "looks like a bomb", you have a serious issue because terrorist bombs are designed specifically to look like EVERYTHING EXCEPT A BOMB.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Ninja on Sep 9th, 2014 @ 4:26am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also, just in case someone doesn't get it I was referring to the wording behind the toy, not real bombs heh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That item is dangerous
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That item is dangerous
Or fell out of the overhead locker at the end of the flight?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: That item is dangerous
Or fell out of the aircraft when it was flushed in the lavatory.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: That item is dangerous
It is indeed heavy as hell for its size.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Poor TSA - it's not illegal to bring non-weaponry on a plane.
There's no law stating what you're claiming, and I know damned well that the TSA does NOT get to write laws, thank entropy for small favors.
Pull your collective heads out of your methane air pockets (your asses you retards), and try breathing regular air for a change, you might actually be able to use those 2 brain cells before they die, and do something worthwhile, like arrest your co-worker for being the child-molester that he or she or it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kudos to the TSA. And major fail on the passenger who thought this was appropriate to carry onto a plane. Practical joke, throwing that fake bomb down the length of the plane?
YEAH, what a moronic passenger, bringing this item, fake or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The traveler should have known better. It's similar to carrying a kid's plastic gun onto the plane. It's clearly not a weapon, but it is also clearly going to get confiscated at the security check point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
and therefore the security guy should not have wasted time over it.
Every minute spent dealing with a clear non-threat is a minute that could have been spent looking for real ones.
What if a real bomb got through because the security people allowed themselves to be distracted with this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No, I'm sure they held the entire line up while the confiscated this, so they did not lose any time available to feel up the next passenger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
TSA - bunch of fucking pedophiles that should be used as ballast at the bottom of the ocean, except that it would toxify the ocean.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If it's silly and obviously not real, then it's equally obviously not a threat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It also left me wondering what percentage of people, upon seeing that image for the first time, think to themselves "paperweight" versus "bomb". If the higher percentage see it as the former rather than the latter, then it makes these TSA folks look even worse than they already do. Their training seems very questionable as a result, which in turn hurts what little credibility they had left.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Take your trolling somewhere else please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: #5 kimchi toeknocker
Just because you have no self-control doesn't mean everyone else says and/or does what the voices in their heads suggest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1. Obviously a toy bomb, even at a glance. (Even if TSA suspected something as stupid as a spy vs. spy scenario of disguising a real bomb as a toy bomb, they have several options for testing that hypothesis that don't involve theft.)
2. As for a "practical joke", at worst that would result in some startled people and the prankster's arrest. Now we're back in the realm of actual "pre-crime" responses to "but what if s/he" fantasies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's people like you that are screwing this world. Are you afraid of gun shaped cookies? Do representations of guns from kids using their hands send chills down your spine?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's not a bomb, it doesn't even LOOK like a bomb to anyone with more than 3 brain cells.
You're not helping here.
STEEL cable, STEEL ball bearing, STEEL nut all welded together is patently not a bomb, does not even remotely resemble a bomb, wouldn't look like a bomb on an x-ray scanner.
No TSA agent alive should be granted kudos, they're all a bunch of child mollesting scum bags. Don't try and play nice with them, they'll think you want to "play" with them.
Hell, a bolo looks more like a bomb than this does, what with natural fiber coming out of 3 ball structures, it looks more like 3 bombs than this does a single bomb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Link to Evan Booth's site: http://terminalcornucopia.com/
So please tell me how dangerous a paper weight is when I can create Fraggucino on my layover...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, what moronic passengers, looking a little like wanted criminals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This attitude pisses me off. The only reason anyone should be wary of carrying an obvious non-bomb onto a plane is because of the possibility of a stupid over-reaction like this. You should direct your 'moron' insults at the people that have allowed things to get so stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I was travelling from Chicago to Detroit and thought for sure that the World's Largest Hershey's Milk Chocolate Bar in my carry on was going to raise some alarm or suspicion. Nope.
Besides, doesn't this let terrorists know to bring aboard devices that look like a bomb?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Voted funny. Bonus chuckles: kenichi and Whatever agreeing on their idiocy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hate to say it, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hate to say it, but...
As a former frequent flyer having wasted hours of my time being "security" screened, this is an absolutely stupid move on the part of the TSA. They should be giving that screener more training, not boasting about discovering an ACME bomb toy.
The TSA seems to keep missing the point. They are supposed to be stopping threats. Not preventing obvious toys from being on the plane. Go ahead, screen it for explosives, it only takes a couple of seconds. But what a waste of time and money to take away what is obviously a non-explosive souvenir. AND, then to brag about it like they saved the world. WHAT A FARCE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hate to say it, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hate to say it, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hate to say it, but...
It's pure security theater.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its a Subject
The TSA is simply the logical extreme, if it looks like a cartoon fake bomb, it must be a real bomb. If it looks like a real bomb, well, we have no idea what a real bomb looks like because they have no idea what a real bomb looks like.
I cant wait till they make a picture of a bomb illegal on the grounds that it could be a bomb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cartoonishness
[BugsBunnyVoice]What an ultra-maroon.[/BugsBunnyVoice]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whether the TSA goons knew that is a different question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also, there were explosive cannon balls. If you take a minute to research you will find that in the civil war they used cannon balls filled with gunpowder and stopped with a fuse. Idea was to time it with the fuse. Did not work all that well, but that is not really the point.
Even knowing all that about very outdated weapons though, this toy is obviously not an explosive. It was just made to jokingly resemble one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That being said the thugs in the TSA really need to spiff up their wardrobe it would be more entertaining to talk about them if they actually wore jackboots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i would have thought though that whoever intended doing something like this, they would have been the subject of another security force having them on their list. surely, with all the 'invasion of privacy' and the 'shoot first, ask after' attitude of the security forces, someone would have an idea of who was going to try what? they wouldn't just decide the day before flying that they were going to become a terrorist and do a bad thing, would they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/sarc, I hope.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
Whoever brought it to the plane is idiot looking for attention. So - he's got it.
Now, it's unclear whether this thing was in luggage or taken in a hand bag. In most places in the world, you can't take such stuff with you - but you can _declare_ and put it to the luggage. Same as a real weapons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
Putting that right next to their statement that real bombs don't look like cartoon bombs, seizing this cartoon bomb does not make much sense.
Since there was once a bomb that looked like shoes, should we stop allowing shoes? They make you take them off and they scan them (not sure how helpful that is), but they don't reject them from the plane.
What about suitcase bombs? Holy crap! People take suitcases onto planes all the time - better stop that.
Some things I can remember that terrorist attackes have used as bomb casings:
- Baby carriage
- Dolls / stuffed animals
- Laptops
- Pregnant women (heck, people for that matter)
If you stop allowing anything that "looks like a bomb", you have a serious issue because terrorist bombs are designed specifically to look like EVERYTHING EXCEPT A BOMB.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
So tell me, when was the last time a plane was hijacked or blown up by something that looked like a bomb? This policy is security theater at it's finest. It's 'doing something', but not actually making anyone safer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm not a TSA fun, but this thing looks real
No, it's not. At all. Have you seen any real bombs? They look nothing like that at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh yeah, we just about had a plane taken down because of an airplane.
Any sane person should understand that if looks like a bomb, acts like a bomb, or smells like one, then it shouldn't be on a plane.
The TSA pulls real guns out of luggage daily, an indication of the idiots who are flying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Assuming you meant tennis shoe, that doesn't help your position. As mentioned above, no bomb anyone has tried to use to blow up a plane has "looked like a bomb". And the next one won't either. It also won't show up as a big solid white lump on x-ray like this one would, because that kind of thing attracts attention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My issue here is that they should not have confiscated it. They could have easily pulled the passenger aside, checked it to be sure it wasn't actually dangerous and then given the passenger two options:
1. Return the clearly, checked, non-bomb to the passengers' checked baggage where it can be safely stowed and inaccessible during the flight.
2. Allow the passenger to have the item boxed and shipped, at his own expense, to his final destination or home.
Either way, the passenger gets to keep his item. I think it's a fair compromise, one that might even help the TSA earn a bit of an image of being more than just government thugs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Psh... the things people think they days....
There ought to be a law!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And there is a law, a secret one no doubt. Long ago we outlawed common sense and most deductive reasoning skills in this country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The only way to really do that would be destructive, like drilling holes into it or perhaps blowing it up.
The passenger doesn't get options because by law, this is what he presented himself to the security with to board the plane. You don't get to try to bring a bunch of things in and then send the ones that don't make it some other way. You are suppose to show up at the security check point with everything already taken care of.
Basically, you don't get to back out of security, for very obvious reasons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This was a TRAVESTY. A huge mockery of even the security theater that used to be so entertaining.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But this isn't always possible. I could easily see myself taking that object on a plane without thinking there would be an issue, because it doesn't look anything like a real bomb would be expected to look.
But then, I've been burned by TSA edge cases enough times now that I don't take any luggage at all when I have to fly anymore. No carry-on and no checked baggage. I ship everything ahead using a parcel service instead. There's no telling what a random TSA agent will find objectionable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oh yeah, sounds like a nice strategy.
TSA goon: *spots a bomb shaped cookie that is incidentally an actual bomb* Seems like it's some explosive!
TSA goon 2: We must test it to check if it really is a bomb! *grabs drill*
Breaking news: "Airport bombed in terror attack"
I'm not even addressing the rest of your inane comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oh, and it's perfectly reasonable to send a non-illegal, but non-dangerous weapon via mail to your destination. With all of the ridiculous rules of the TSA, how can you be prepared for everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, they do -- however most explosives contain the oxidizer as part of the explosive mix itself, so don't need access to air to do their thing.
Also, most "airtight" containers aren't actually airtight enough to prevent a dog from being able to detect the scent of the contents anyway.
"You won't be allowed on the plane for safety reasons, but you're allowed to back out of security at any time."
No, you really aren't. Once the screening process has begun, you can't legally decide to abort it. If you refuse to cooperate past that point, you can be arrested and levied an $11,000 fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Conventions, anyone?
the ultra-important-and-totally-qualified-for-the-job (/sarc) TSA agents could learn a thing or two
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I bet the TSA wants this f-bomb...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Super-geniuses?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So how do they get these to purchasers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know this is old, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]