TSA Punishes Pilot For Videotaping Security Problems At Airports

from the brushing-problems-under-the-rug dept

BackPackAdam alerts us to the news that a pilot in California is being disciplined by the TSA because he dared to film a video highlighting problems with security at San Francisco International Airport (SFO). The pilot himself was a Flight Deck Officer (FDO) and authorized to carry a gun on board of flights... but within days of him posting the videos to YouTube, he was met by four federal air marshals and two sheriff's deputies at his house, who ordered him to hand over his gun and to hand over his state-issued permit to carry a concealed weapon. He has since been informed that the TSA is reviewing his situation for possible disciplinary measures.
The whole thing is pretty ridiculous. All he was doing was highlighting problems with the system (specifically pointing out how pilots have to go through the full security procedure -- even though he's allowed to carry a gun and a weird axe thing onboard, while ground crew can get through security with just the swipe of a card). The guy was highlighting flaws in the system -- classic whistleblowing, but rather than fix the system, the message from the TSA is clear: if you point out flaws in our system, we'll take it out on you. It's classic shoot-the-messenger behavior. The guy says he doesn't regret what he did, but does seem a bit surprised that rather than responding to the problems, the feds seem to be coming after him.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 7:10pm

    Interesting

    They apparently got him to take the youtube vid down, anyway (leastways, I can't find it.)

    Problem solved!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    Revi (profile), Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 7:11pm

    Sounds like he got off lightly. Isn't standard practice for whistle-blowing in the US 6 months in solitary confinement with no trial?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Robert, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 8:00pm

    Really?!?!?!

    6 months in solitary… I thought it was identifying him as a terrorist removing his rights as an American and ship him down to Cuba.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 8:21pm

    Rate Your Patdown

    It's good to get this type of feedback because it looks like few people are talking about their SFO experience. Right now, it looks like Westchester County Airport in Harrison, NY has the best TSA agents, with Dallas coming in with a strong second place.

    http://www.rateyourpatdown.com/

    If TSA at SFO has begun punishing pilots, it's no wonder why so few people are talking about their SFO flight experience!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    villas ibiza, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 8:38pm

    TSA Punishes Pilot For Videotaping Security Problems At Airports

    Now finally the culprit is arrested...He must be given hard punishment on his bloody act..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    bob, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 9:30pm

    The System Works

    Recall that comment right after the underwear bomber tried to blow up a plane last Christmas, Janet Napolitano came out an said "The System Works" after a swarthy middle eastern male bought a one way ticket, with out luggage, paid cash for the trip, and did not have a passport, and boarded a plane to the USA.

    So when you call out the performers in this TSA lack of safety theater your are the one who gets the G-Man stiff arm.

    We need to take our Government back, away from these fools.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Dawger (profile), Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 10:05pm

    TSA

    This is just another example of how absolutely worthless the TSA and airport security is. The TSA is 66,000 Federal Employees that have no, none, nada reason to exist. Theater is all it is period... Janet and her gang should be run out of town on a rail...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Kcg, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 10:15pm

    Re: The System Works

    Um... the system did work. Plane landed safely, nobody hurt, terrorist in custody. That is the best possible outcome. That incident is, in fact, evidence that we don't need "security" than we already have, but instead need more research and inveatigation. Napolitano probably shouldn't have been bashed for saying that, but she was, so now we have these dumb security theater pat-downs to look for underpants bombs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    vrio, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 10:34pm

    Posting a video on youtube is not the way to point out a active security flaw. That might working in the computer world sometimes but this is peoples lifes. also it would waste billions to check them every time they come back in from the run way they go in and out hundreds of times a day.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    vrio, Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 10:36pm

    work*

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    TechDan (profile), Dec 23rd, 2010 @ 10:51pm

    Re: Re: The System Works

    Your naivete is cute.

    The underwear bomber boarded a plane outside the US and was caught by passengers on the plane when his pants bomb failed to ignite. Security was an utter failure, and would have failed just as horribly had the bomber attempted to board from within the US. In no way, shape, or form did the "system" work. That's why she was justly bashed for that statement.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Liz, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 1:26am

    This is like that bit in the Wizard of Oz. That is if the Wizard shot Toto after he pulled back the curtain.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    John Evans, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 4:39am

    This kinda BS

    Surprised at outcome? Not me. The poor bastard should have seen this coming. I don't mind security, but they handle everything poorly. TSA in NW Florida have all been good to us, but in some other places they totally suck.

    My biggest beef is that they routinely act (as a group) in ways that seem unconstitutional, far above the law and responsibility.

    The whole thing is like a huge power trip gone bad. Does your job suck? then get out. If you hate your job, only do it for the retirement, and want to take it out on other people, then be a prison guard.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 5:08am

    Re: Re: Re: The System Works

    Please read the entire comment instead of just the first sentence or two.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 5:12am

    Leadership

    This patriot may be serious leadership material.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Gary (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:03am

    What happen to the whistle blower act were you could point out problems in the government and not fear retaliation?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    Joe Krahn (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:20am

    Sensitive security info?

    I think he only showed public areas that thousands of people have access to. How can they say this was sensitive security information?

    I thought the tarmac was supposed to be a secure area. Do the workers not go through any security screening at all??

    In any case, it is obvious that TSA is just for show. We can assume that there will be no more successful hijackings for kamikaze purposes, because passengers will suspect it, and no longer be passive captives. All that TSA can prevent is the bombing of a single plane, which is less effective than bombing a movie theater, where there is no security screening.

    The sad part is that there are so many naive Americans that are fooled by the TSA show.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    cobarde, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:22am

    Re:

    Point to who then?, the responsibles of security are aware of these flaws, dont?

    If not, why spend so many dollars?.

    So... the answer its inform the public to twist they arm.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    cobarde, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:37am

    Re: This kinda BS

    "The poor bastard should have seen this coming" He see that coming... he recorded the visit of the TSA, dont u get it?... And yes, he want out of that farse but in a blazing way...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    BLanville, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:42am

    Still Not Legal

    Okay, I get the idea that he is a whistle blower. But it shouldn't be ignored that he broke the law. Video recordings are not legal, with a few exceptions, of airports security zones. This rule also applies to nuke facilities, some portions of military base security and a few other government facilities. He should have logged his complaint the correct way, then backed it up with a talking tour with the cable news nuts. Let them make the films and keep himself of the "no-fly" list, that he is assuredly on.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 7:03am

    Turns out that he is part of the FFDO program, and is essentially an Air Marshall. He is authorized to carry a firearm on the plane, and operates as part of the FFDO program. Part of that program requires that members do not divulge any information regarding the program or airport security to third parties.

    Essentially, to be a whistleblower, he has to accept the consequences of doing so. Right or wrong, he violated the rules of the program and was removed from it. There are plenty of other ways (internally, and even externally) where he could have been a whistleblower without making the information widely available to the public (and for that matter to potential terrorists).

    He did it the wrong way, he will cost the system plenty of money (as they will be forced to change systems only to make what he showed no longer valid, not to "fix" what he thinks are problems), and he will find himself on the outside looking in.

    I would say that he is a well intentioned fool, who threw himself on the sword. Too bad that it will be meaningless, because the story is no longer about security, but about how much of a dough head he was for posting it on youtube.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 7:17am

    Re: Still Not Legal

    Video recordings are not legal
    --Provide citation please.
    This and this are what TSA says about the matter. These statemenst seem to contradict you, although they may not as clear cut as one would like.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 8:16am

    That pilot compiled information anyone could have put together from available sources. I dare anyone to find one thing he showed that was not already known. So that means he was pulled out for exercising free speech which apparently is not tolerated any longer. So, given that, were his rights violated? Was he oppressed by the government in an unconstitutional manner? Is this an example of what is happening now, has happened in the past, or is this the direction they are moving in or have they done even more egregious things?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Mike Reiter, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:03am

    Re: @Gary - What happen(sic) to the whistle blower act...?

    Apparently it doesn't apply to the Airport Gestapo. While we're wondering, what happened to our constitutional protection against unlawful search and seizure? Warrant-less searches because we choose to travel have little or no basis in law...at least not in law that is constitutional.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:07am

    Re:

    This is the sort of thing that happens when people respect the law instead of just doing what's right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Stuart, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:09am

    Re:

    You can not spell. Your ability to apply logic to this situation is lacking. There was no coherent point to your post that I could find.
    Because of this I deem your opinion here to be worthless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:16am

    Re: The System Works

    That would be "the G-man stiffy"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Mikeyrinfl (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:17am

    Re: Re:

    @Stuart - to whom are your comments directed? If they are directed to anonymous Coward, perhaps you've set the bar too high? :) In any event, personal slights reveal more about you than anyone else. Happy Holidays!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 12:03pm

    Re: Still Not Legal

    > But it shouldn't be ignored that he broke the law. Video recordings
    > are not legal, with a few exceptions, of airports security zones.

    That's absolute nonsense. He didn't show anything in that video that any other member of the public can see themselves. And people are constantly taking photos and videos of themselves in airports in the exact same places that this guy was filming.

    The only place in an airport that has an enforceable legal prohibition against filming and cell phone use is the Customs checkpoint in the international terminal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    JMT, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 12:59pm

    Re:

    “There are plenty of other ways (internally, and even externally) where he could have been a whistleblower without making the information widely available to the public (and for that matter to potential terrorists).”

    And how far do you really think that would’ve gotten? People have been complaining about this stuff in public for years and what’s happened! With this level of bureaucratic incompetence it’s likely that public outrage is the only way things will get changed.

    “He did it the wrong way, he will cost the system plenty of money (as they will be forced to change systems only to make what he showed no longer valid, not to "fix" what he thinks are problems)...”

    Let’s say they do actually make some changes (doubtful). They’ll either make things worse (based on history, more inconvenient but almost certainly not more secure), in which case the ridiculousness of the system will be further highlighted and you should be appalled. Or, the changes will make things better (more secure!) and the pilot’s efforts will have been successful!

    “I would say that he is a well intentioned fool, who threw himself on the sword. Too bad that it will be meaningless, because the story is no longer about security, but about how much of a dough head he was for posting it on youtube.”

    Maybe to you, but to any right-minded person the story is absolutely about the security flaws and the government's knee-jerk response to their exposure. As with Wikileaks, so many want to shoot the messenger while ignoring the terrible message. That’s just plain nuts.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 1:26pm

    As a flight crew member who is in substantial part responsible for flight safety and the safety of airline passengers, this individual demonstrated incredibly poor judgment by proceeding as he did.

    Hopefully members of military aviation units will shun his lead.

    There are ways to effectively raise issues such as these, but uploading to the internet is not one of them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    icon
    Stephen (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 2:33pm

    Parallels the tech industry

    The TSA seems to be practicing what the tech industry called, "Security by Obscurity". It fails in tech. It fails everywhere else too.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 2:45pm

    Anyone who actually believes that the TSA prevents terror attacks should be in long-term care for delusional behavior. They have not, and never will stop a determined terror attack, and all of their stupid and useless scans and patdowns are totally devoid of value and meaning. One day, horribly enough, their total inadequacy will become all to painfully apparent to the nation, but unfortunately it will once again be too little, too late. Enjoy the security theater, fools. I have simply stopped flying entirely, and while it limits my range, I have a peace of mind and sense of security that they will never, ever provide. Put simply, there's no place that I can ever see a need to go to that would ever justify my going through the gigantic insult to human dignity that air travel in the US has become. My outlook is quite simple - it's simply not worth going to jail for kicking the teeth out of the TSA agent who molests me because they're "just doing their job". Adoph Eichmann tried that defense of why he was "just doing his job", and at the end of the day, he was at the end of a rope!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 4:05pm

    Re: Re:

    "That might working in the computer world sometimes but this is peoples lifes"

    You're the pot calling the kettle black.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 4:50pm

    Re:

    > There are ways to effectively raise issues such as these, but
    > uploading to the internet is not one of them.

    Apparently not. Pilots and airport staff have been pointing out these flaws in security to the authorities for years and nothing has been done. Maybe being publicly embarrassed is the only way to light a fire under them and get them to do something about it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 24th, 2010 @ 4:54pm

    CCW

    While the feds pretty much have blanket authority to grant and revoke a license to carry a firearm on a plane for whatever reasons they want, that's not true of local law enforcement.

    I'd be real interested to know what legal justification that county sheriff had for revoking the pilot's state CCW permit. And also what legal grounds he had to confiscate the pilot's firearm. The fact that he no longer had a license to carry a concealed firearm doesn't mean he's prohibited from owning and possessing a firearm in his own home.

    I bet you, if pressed, the sheriff will just say, "The feds told me to." As if that somehow makes it legal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Transbot9, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 6:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: The System Works

    It wasn't even a real bomb..at worst, he would have succeeded at castrating himself from 2nd and 3rd degree burns.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 7:08pm

    it's just like not broadcasting your router SSID. it's not a problem if no one knows right? right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    prt, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 7:10pm

    They don’t call it the department of homeland stupidity for nothing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    identicon
    viro, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 9:41pm

    So let me get this right unless they secure a public place 100% (which is impossible) the TSA is a waste? I can tell you guys don't work in the security industry. also he never said the runway crew doesn't go through security just that they can come back from the runaway without going through security every time. which is a secure zone anyways which makes this whole "flaw" kinda silly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    identicon
    Tech Scott, Dec 24th, 2010 @ 10:58pm

    Freedom isn't Free

    This Flight Deck Officer needs to be working at a conveience store and not at a job where he is responsible for the saftey of others. The folks that commented that the TSA reaction was unwarranted also need to be pushing slurpees. The Flight Deck Officer wasn't wrong for noticing the problems, he used criminally bad judgement for posting it on a public forum (YouTube). There are *many* venues for addressing issues available to him such as his airline's security department, TSA and Homeland Security. If none of those agencies responded he could have gone public through his Congressman, Senator or Union. Any reasonable method of exposing the security issues would not have exposed them to those wishing to kill Americans. In the end all this guy did was put people in danger and likely cost himself his career. Shame on you that defend this idiot!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    icon
    dara (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 12:00am

    says

    hey don’t call it the department of homeland stupidity for nothing. administration jobs

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    identicon
    sam sin, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 2:47am

    typical US government reaction. 'we've fu**ed up, but it's your fault, so you're in the crap'! doesn't really matter who sees the video, the problems still need fixing. this is not the way to do that!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 4:59am

    Re: Freedom isn't Free

    Freedom isn't free? Nice little bit of total malarkey there, pal. Not only is it not free, it no longer exists once you choose to fly. However, the resultant lack of freedom is pretty darned expensive, from what I can see. Stop confusing freedom with restriction, as it is a contradiction.

    You are obviously one of the hopelessly deluded who believes that there actually are legitimate and working avenues for resolving painfully obvious problems in government agencies, and either never worked in government yourself, or you're just another TSA shill, which is more likely. Here's a clue - in government agencies of all types in this country, the bearers of negative facts are invariably punished for that. "Ignore that man behind the curtain! The great and powerful Oz will protect us all!"

    In terms of idiocy, I think you surpass this pilot, as well as most people, in every respect. You're the one who should be feeling shame, but I gather you have no shame at all. Merry Christmas, fool!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    icon
    TechScott (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 5:42am

    Re: Re: Freedom isn't Free

    Another anarchist. Although I’m no Democrat-Socialist, I do understand the need to do the best job we (as a society) can to protect ourselves to those that want to kill our citizens. Our government was formed under the principals of mutual self defense. Though few remember this in the Obama socialist revolution of the last election, it is one of the few original principals from our founding fathers that basically remain intact. Those that reject all efforts to protect our citizens because they are not perfect and impinge on any modicum of their freedom simply aren’t living in the real (imperfect) world. The fact that they have survived in the delusional state shows that the basic defense machine is working. You should thank the men and women at Homeland Security and the Defense Department who allow you to be a self deluded anarchist. Please rant away as it makes my case with my having to make any additional effort.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    icon
    TechScott (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 5:47am

    Re:

    By your logic someone dhould post a sign on your windshield everytime you forget to lock you door?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    icon
    BLaneville (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:23am

    Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    I have no internet citation, I only have my training to rely on. In counterintelligence and counter-terrorism courses, paid for by the DHS & USN. I sure that if one needed written confirmation, he/she could spend hours scouring the internet or write multiple letters to the DHS and get a reply.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    icon
    BLaneville (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:47am

    Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    Video has the ability to be accurately reviewed multiple times, what a person sees cannot not be reviewed accurately multiple times. Also he did not take a photo of himself, he took video of security weaknesses, his video was then posted for public viewing. You are attempting to argue a blurry TSA provision, but TSA is not the only governing body. Check also CA state laws (which are admittedly unclear) and local laws.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 7:07am

    Re: Re: Re: Freedom isn't Free

    Talk about ranting - that's all you seem to do. You're obviously a TSA shill trying to gull everyone into believing that what they do actually has real-world value sufficient to justify their gigantic budget and disgustingly intrusive practices. And then you had to throw the anti-Obama crap in for good measure. Gee, I'm shocked! Shocked!

    Your "real world" doubtless involves tinfoil hats, one-world government conspiracies, and boogeymen under everyones' beds, which DOD, DHS and TSA will surely protect us from, if we only consent to be stripped of our privacy and dignity every time we wish to travel. Oh, and if they want to intercept our mail and telecommunications, that's probably OK with you too. I'm sure you're also in favor of full-cavity searches and water-boarding all passengers until they confess to anything you want them to.

    Listen up, fascist-boy (hey, if you can call me anarchist, I can respond in kind), I and many others don't agree with your paranoid delusions, and that doesn't make us anarchists, communists, socialists or pinkos of one stripe or another. Expressing whatever other political beliefs that disagree with yours is the thing that seems to put you into your typical ranting tailspin. Now scurry off to your bomb shelter and light your aluminum tree while trying to enjoy the holiday despite the fact that many people think you're full of it. And try not to grind your teeth too hard.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 7:10am

    Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    Why would anyone want to do that? Writing letters to DHS is like writing letters to Santa Claus. You don't seem to have a real understanding of how your government works, do you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 9:32am

    Re: Rate Your Patdown

    When I flew in to SFO this month and went through security (came in from international then went domestic) there was no TSA, it was CAS. They looked exactly like TSA but all TSA markings were replaced by CAS (Covenant Aviation Security). I figured all their security was CAS, maybe TSA is at one or more of the other checkpoints?

    Also when I went through that time they weren't doing random backscatter scans...if you happened to be in a specific line (we were directed to lines based on our flight) you were scanned but at least 2 or 3 other lines had nobody going through the body scan. Kind of defeats the purpose of random screenings if someone can just pick the line with just the metal detector.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 9:37am

    Re:

    You're talking about wasting money to screen ground crew when we're already spending how much for that security theater? Either everyone should be checked or no one. But since it is all theater I guess it really doesn't matter too much anyway. Just because someone is "trusted" doesn't mean they aren't a terrorist. The leaked documents on Wikileaks is plenty of evidence for that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  53.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 9:44am

    Re: This kinda BS

    I'd say I'd be surprised at the outcome but with the way things have been going lately I'm not. One thing that really bugs me about the whole thing is they took his state issued license to carry a concealed weapon. That had NOTHING to do with his job or this incident. They're just doing whatever the hell they want.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  54.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 9:46am

    Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    If it's a law then it should be freely available. Your courses don't impress me. Having been through courses provided by the government I doubt they said anything about laws regarding video recordings.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  55.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 9:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    Sounds like you have no idea what law prevents video recordings in an airport. Just because video can be analyzed doesn't make it illegal. That's like saying I can't record video of a federal building from a public sidewalk because I could then analyze it for unlocked windows.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  56.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 3:24pm

    He should be FIRED, and never be able to work in the security industry again.

    Yes that is right, there is a law that prevents viedo recording in an airport..

    It is also clear that he is in NO WAY a whistleblower, he did not 'see' something wrong, and immediately report it to the authorities.

    He saw something wrong, and made that information to anyone who might be willing to exploit that wrong thing.

    He posted it on freaking youtube, he did not walk over to the airport security office, and report what he has seen.

    And by all accounts of what he does for a job, it is his responsibility to report security issues.

    Did he do that ???

    NO WAY.. he did not..

    He did not do his job, he video's it, took it home, and put it on Youtube..

    He did that for his own gains, he did not do it to improve airport security..

    As it is clear that if he was interested in doing his job, he would have reported it immediately.

    Instead he made the security system flaw, public knowledge..

    The police, and court and the authorities, would have had no choice but to remove him from his job, take away any responsibilities in that area away from him..

    And quite possibly put him in prison..

    What he did not reject his job, and his responsibilities, he did not report a security breach, at all.

    He just illegally recorded it (there is a good reason why you cant record are airports).

    But HE DID NOT DO HIS JOB, his job is to watch for security issues, and report them.. not to freaking Youtube, but to his bosses.

    They did not right thing,

    Take away his job
    take away his gun
    take away his responsibility

    take away his freedom..

    It does not matter that he video'd it, what is more important is that his job was to report such activities to his bosses..

    He did not do his job, he wanted to big note himself, so he took it upon himself to break the law, and to break the condition of his employment.

    as I said,

    Im sure there are alot more people in the USA right now that would take on that job and do it responsibility.

    The TSA does not need to continue to hire someone who does not, or is not willing to do the job they are assigned too.

    And if they did fire him,, GOOD,, as that is exactly what should of happend..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  57.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 3:54pm

    Re:

    Put simply, there's no place that I can ever see a need to go to that would ever justify my going through the gigantic insult to human dignity that air travel in the US has become.


    and all of their stupid and useless scans and patdowns are totally devoid of value and meaning.

    I have simply stopped flying entirely, and while it limits my range, I have a peace of mind and sense of security that they will never, ever provide

    That is sort of funny and very sad at the same time, so you hate security at airports, you state that its ineffective, and bad.

    Then you claim you will never fly again, (that will get them!!)).

    So what effect has it had of you personally, your freedoms, your ability to travel.

    So you are willing to severly restrict your lifestype, and rights, and your freedoms.. In a silent protect about the TSA. The group you complain are too intruesive, and at the same time, not effective.

    They must be effective you wont even fly without carrying a bomb..

    So what would you think now days, if you had to fly and take a bomb with you ?

    So by your own admission the system is working very well.

    Its stopped you flying and you are not doing anything wrong, because the searches are too much for you.

    So if you were trying to carry a bomb, then you would be even more scared.

    So saying they are ineffective, and at the same time, saying the effect of you is that you have stopped flying alltogether.

    Not because of terrorist attacks, or the risk of them,, but because you do not like the people who are trying to stop those attacks from occuring.

    Seems you are somewhat confused...

    What is sounds like is that you are just rattling off opinions are statements that you really do not yourself understand, trying to string them together, to form something coherent.. But it did not work out.

    its clear you do not really understand the statement you make, nor can you see the contradiction between them..

    So if this guy worked at a bank as a security officer, and he recorded the manager opening the safe, and showing the safes conbination, what that be whisstle blowing, or would it be a criminal act..

    Its a criminal act, he job is to maintain security, and report security issues to his bosses.

    He did not carry out his job, a job of great responsibility.

    So he should be fired, and imprisioned.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  58.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 4:08pm

    Re: Freedom isn't Free.. you pay a high price for freedom

    well said viro, and very well said Tech Scott.

    Shame on you that defend this idiot!

    Mike's main concern is that his should have a right to post anything he likes on the internet, and once you do post it on the internet. That information should be in the public domain, and free for all to see and use as they with.

    So, if you are a terrorist, and you can find some information from that Youtube clip, that might make you're next terror attack plan a little easier. (even just finding out what clothes the ground crew are wearing etc).

    You, Mike have NO way to determine the consequences of such information being EASILY available.

    You say its a public area, sure that is right, IF you happen to BE THERE, what if you are in the middle east, and want to 'case' the joint for security issues ?

    How do you know what could come out of this type of information, it is the same with wikileaks, you have no idea of the possible consequences that information might provide, especially in aggregate, spies gather information from as many sources as possible, and from that information, some of which may be meaingless by itself, once they have enough information..

    It allows them to 'build a picture' of what is probably happending..

    In world war 2 german spies would go around london and see if the lights were on late at night in the defense ministry buildings.

    From that information, they could help build a picture of a possible invasion being planned.

    You have no idea, what value that information could have in the right (wrong) hands.

    But because he posted it on yourtube, you are willing to go to bad for him (Mike), make him out as a hero. when in fact he is a fool..

    And anyone who things he is an honest 'whistleblower' is equally a food.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  59.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 5:45pm

    Re: - another confused person

    Think about what you are saying, read it to yourself, and see if it makes any sense..

    for example..

    Anyone who actually believes that the TSA prevents terror attacks should be in long-term care for delusional behavior. They have not, and never will stop a determined terror attack, and all of their stupid and useless scans and patdowns are totally devoid of value and meaning

    And your classic is this:
    Even though you hate the searches patdowns, and x rays, and as you are saying that is **TOO MUCH** you then come out with this classic line !!! :)

    One day, horribly enough, their total inadequacy will become all to painfully apparent to the nation, but unfortunately it will once again be too little, too late...


    Do you see how you are somewhat confused ?.

    Which is it, too much, or too little too late ?.

    I wonder who the fool is here.. ???


    so these stupid and useless scanns and patdown are totally doviod of value and meaning.. yes that is true, they are not supposed to be of value or meaning, they are intended to try to find people who are taking object's onto aircraft that are illegal.

    If you like, the 'value' is **IF** they find a bomb, the value is the saving of lives and assets.

    The "meaning", what do you think to meaning of trying to find people taking illegal things onboard aircraft is ?

    You do not understand what that "means" ??? really !!!!!


    So you complain loudly about they they are doing too much, and being too strict.

    then you make this statement !!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  60.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:02pm

    Re:

    They have not, and never will stop a determined terror attack,

    What OTHER kind of terror attacks ARE there TDC ?

    undetermined terror attack ?

    random terror attack ?

    I would say EVERY terror attack plot or attempt that has been stopped, was condusted by someone who was determined to make an attack.

    so once again, how does that statement make any sense at all ? to you, or to anyone else..

    then you say its valueless and meaning less, but its value to you is that it has stopped you flying, and im sure the same effect would apply to people who were going to try and fly while taking a bomb with them.

    Do you not see that logic ? or is that beyond you.

    You wont fly even if you are doing nothing wrong, so why would someone fly knowing they ARE doing something wrong ??

    Again, your logic is highly flawed.

    Many places, and businesses, have specific conditions of entry, if you go to your local supermarket (here in Australia), a condition of entry is that if asked you must show the contents of your bags.

    A condition of entry to a jet aircraft is that you prove to TSA's satisfaction that you are not taking onboard anything illegal.

    Its as simple as that, and its value is in the fact that if it is enough to stop you from flying, when you do nothing wrong, it will probably stop someone from trying to take a bomb with them, or to do something illegal..

    Again, you rant is full of contradictions, you constantly shoot down your own argument.

    You whine about how its TOO MUCH, then state its TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE !!!!!..

    at the same time !!!!! :) at least its amusing.. thanks..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  61.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:09pm

    Re: Parallels the tech industry

    Got a hack for a Radio Shack TRS-80 Level II ?

    What about a hack for a 2650, running mickbug, or pipbug ?
    What about a hack for a VMS operating system on a mainframe.

    Do you have a hack for a DECnet system ?
    What about for the Symax PLC protocol ?
    what about for the DNP PLC protocol ? (hardly obscure).

    What hacks do you have for the AmegaOS ?


    Encryption is a very very affective form of security by Obscurity, and it DOES work, and is used everywhere.

    If you do not think security by obcurity does not work, that simply means you do not understand the term, or understand what security is! one or the other.. either way its a lack of understanding on your part.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  62.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:12pm

    Re: Parallels the tech industry

    By the way, how about explaining to all your fans who the TSA is practicing "Security by Obscurity", as it applies to the tech industry..

    (it actually applies to the security industry, first word being "security").

    But how is the TSA doing anything you would consider "obscure"... explain yourself, so at least we know you are not talking through your A$$..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  63.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:28pm

    Its common knowledge anyway..

    Everyone knows, that the ground crew can move around within the secure area without being checked everytime they go onto the apron.

    It would be stupid to do otherwise, once they are checked into that secure area, they are no longer subject to checks.

    And there is high security for ground crew, and luggage staff, they are security background checked, they have a low level security clearance, and they are vetted and checked daily..

    Just like the pilot, once he goes through checking, and boards the plane, which is a secure area, there is no requirement for him to be searched again..

    Just like the ground crew,

    there has been issues in the past there ground crews have been found guilty of smuggling items, or drugs, and as a result security has been increased. It's an identified problem..

    But filming people working at the airport apron is **NOT** whistleblowing.. as its common knowledge.

    Its also stupid to expect every time groundcrew move from one place in a secure area to another place in that secure area, that they need to be rechecked !!..

    Stupid is a harsh word, but what would you call it ?

    You just cannot 'whistleblow' on something that was a big public issue, and a very high profile news and media item and it was over 5 years ago !!!..

    The only thing he has done is show the world is own stupidity, and lack of understanding of security, no wonder they fired him and took his gun away..

    Its not the right line of work for someone like that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  64.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:37pm

    Re: Parallels the tech industry

    Encryption is security by obscurity, does that work ? hell yes..

    you can easily find hacks for common systems like windows ect, there are alot of people using it and testing it's security.

    Try to find some hacks for the VMS operating system, it has been around longer than windows. But its far more obscure.

    What is more obscure than a message, that has a key, and is encoded.. or encrypted. when only one person has to key to unlock that message?

    That is "security by obsecrity".

    And would you like to explain what the TSA does that is "obscurity", or obscure??

    They are obscure because they do what ???

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  65.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 25th, 2010 @ 6:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    Perfect, you dont want to know the facts, as it might interfere with your opinions.

    BLaneville might or might not have an understanding of the internet, but so what ??

    He was not talking about the internet, and unlike you he does not think an understanding of the internet has anything at all to do with what he was saying.

    What he was saying is correct, not only in America, but world wide, there are building, places, area's where it is ILLEGAL to photograph, or video..

    We have TV add's here in Australia, that explain the laws and rules of countries in this regard.

    For example, one is a add, that show's three scenes, a couple kissing, a busker playing a guitar and singing and a couple getting their photo taken in front of a Government building.

    They ask, which one of these is an illegal act and could result in your being imprisoned ?

    can you guess ?

    Thats right, it was the young couple getting their photo taken infront of a government building.

    Its a travel warning add, and it explains that in other countries, (and our's) there are places where you cannot photograph or film.. without at least gaining specific permission..

    And if you are not aware of that, then it may be a good thing you have decided never to fly again.

    You may not do so well in another country.. or even your own.

    the Australian parliment his broadcast on the tv and radio nation wide, and live, that if you are are visitor to parliment house, you are forbidden from taking anyone kind of camera, or recording device with you..

    ive had to work at places where they would not even grant you access to the place if you carried a pen and paper with you..

    you had to only take what you were waring, in and out of the place.

    if you turned up with a camera, you would be told to leave.. after handing in the camera..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  66.  
    icon
    The Devil's Coachman (profile), Dec 25th, 2010 @ 8:39pm

    To Darryl: please try spell check sometime. Too bad that won't help much!

    Hey, Darryl. Looks like you're off your meds again! Your furious posting pace, liberally strewn with spelling, grammar, and syntax errors makes me think that you are actually good old Scott, three sheets to the wind, or maybe off his anti-psychotic meds, or perhaps both. Congratulations! You have achieved new heights, or perhaps depths in illogic, incoherence, and idiocy! I won't waste another moment of my time responding to your obviously deranged spew, other than to take note that you are a complete idiot, incapable of critical thought, as a direct result of your not having completed school past the sixth grade. Merry Christmas, Zippy. Continue upholding the pinhead principles you so honor. Have another beer. I guess after you failed your GED test for the fortieth or fiftieth time, you finally found your true calling - pointless rants on the InterWebs, eh? Buh-bye!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  67.  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 6:49am

    If they feel the need to 'hide' so badly that the fire employees over videos - what does it say about them?

    Many companies are Proud of how they operate and would have no issues with full disclosure to the public.

    Obviously; this is NOT the case with the publicly FUNDED TSA.

    Just one more reason to not fly is all.

    And I think it's funny all of you going on about 'security' and how they need to be 'careful' of the information. Don't you think the REAL terrorists, have people on the inside and have long since known this all? And while we worry about air travel, they are - no doubt - doing something much different. Why would they bother with where the government is expecting it and obviously going overboard on 'security'.

    They would want to concentrate on areas you don't hear about on a friggin' DAILY basis... simple logic. Too bad government has no concept of such things.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  68.  
    icon
    Christopher (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 8:43am

    Re:

    No, that isn't standard practice, and if you are talking about Manning.... there are some questions as to whether them keeping him in the Army equivalent of 'jail' is legal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  69.  
    icon
    Christopher (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 8:46am

    Re:

    Yes, it is the way to point out an active security flaw, to be blunt. It is CLASSIC WHISTLEBLOWING to be blunt, and it's idiots like you who give Americans a bad name.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  70.  
    icon
    Christopher (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 8:50am

    With all due respect, they shouldn't have suspended this man nor seized his lawfully given concealed carry permit. That might actually be illegal, because he has NOT been charged with any crime nor is he a convicted criminal, they are just doing an investigation at this point.

    This seems like jackbooting thug behavior from the TSA, which they need to be stomped on for... SEVERELY! With suspensions, dismissals of the agents, and perhaps criminal charges against the agents for abuse of police power.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  71.  
    identicon
    Revelati, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 10:35am

    1. Repeated attempts were made through official channels to have this problem resolved, nothing was done...

    2. Video of sensitive material is taken every day, there are more than 3 billion cell phones in this world and many of them have cameras, the fact that he posted on you tube tell me that he is definitely NOT working for a foreign power or terrorist organization.

    3. The TSA sucks at life, every week there is a new debacle. While they are strip searching grannies in the terminal, someone in coveralls and a name tag could hop the fence and load whatever the hell he wanted onto the plane.

    Bottom line. This video makes the government look like idiots, because in real life that's how they act. If the public learns how inept the people in charge of their safety really are they would get upset and demand "change" Of course no one has the faintest idea of what sort of "change" would help so they avoid it at all costs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  72.  
    icon
    iamtheky (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 11:13am

    Until the T-shirt is made...

    Darryl is the worst troll ever.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  73.  
    identicon
    Wolfy, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 12:18pm

    Who said the village only had to have one idiot?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  74.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 12:22pm

    Re:

    Darryl is the worst troll ever.

    Thankyou, you are right, I am not a very good troll, that is why I do not engage in that activity.

    A troll is someone who makes a post, but does not address anything that was stated.. you know like what you just did.

    So I might be the worst troll ever, but you are THE BEST troll EVER.. you've clearly been doing it for quite some time.

    You're trolling has reached new levels, You really do deserve that T-shirt, that say's "Worlds BEST TROLL".

    But if you upset you that much then my work here is done.

    And if I made you think for a second that would have been nice too.. cant expect too much thought.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  75.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 12:38pm

    Re:

    Yes, that is why you are allowed in your town.

    It would not matter for you, would it ?? you have at least ONE in your town. There are probably several, but you cant count that high,, ie 2..

    But really wolfy, is that the best you can come up with ??

    You've had a bit of time to think about it, and that is all you can give me ? kinda sucks ?

    If you are going to try to insult me, you could have done a much better job.. or maybe you are what you talk off.

    Maybe your total range is the ability to call people village idiots, and the other person can only call people troll. (at the same time you are both trolls).

    But again, is that the best response you can come up with, I guess once you have run out of any form of logic and reasoning, you have no choice but to resort to. comments..

    What would you call them ?? stupid comments, troll comments, pointless comments.

    Comments that show off you're (lack of) level of understanding. and it shows you lack depth, so if you cant think of anything intelligent to say, you will just say whatever comes into your head..

    Which is usually nothing more complex than a simple, purile little whine.

    And all that achieves is that it makes you look like shallow, uninformed trolls, and whiners with little to add but some stupid, and purile comment...

    Get a clue people, really the likes of Wolfy needs to go back to school for awile and move out of mum's basement..

    But please do SOMETHING, to get a clue..otherwise it might be better for you just to keep you mouth shut, rather than opening it and showing everyone little depth you have.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  76.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 1:24pm

    Re: To Darryl: please try spell check sometime. Too bad that won't help much!

    at least I have not given up flying because I'm just so scared of those nasty TSA people..

    But nice troll, or attempt at least.. and of course when you have nothing left to say, you just rant..

    But nice attempt at good old reliable ad hominen comebacks, the last resort of a fool.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  77.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 1:50pm

    Re:

    If they feel the need to 'hide' so badly that the fire employees over videos - what does it say about them?

    It says they have specific rules regarding photographs and video's of what they consider sensitive area's. Its a common practice world wide. They are not hiding anything, they are enforcing the rules. The rules that guy was employed to obey.

    Many companies are Proud of how they operate and would have no issues with full disclosure to the public

    Ok, Name some, name some companies that make public their day to day operational details ?

    I think you will struggle to think of a single one.

    Obviously; this is NOT the case with the publicly FUNDED TSA.

    Just one more reason to not fly is all.


    We'll the airport is publicly funded, the airlines are publicly funded, all the shop's at the airport, or the travel agents and booking agents are all publicly funded.

    Ie, but public funds them, by paying those companies, I think what you might of been thinking about is Government funded.

    That is totally different to public funded, and if you think your tax many is funding much of anything in the USA these days, then you are sadly mistaken.

    You might as well say it funded from loans off China, that our children will have to pay back..

    Its funded by the $30,000 plus debt that every US citizen owes to china..

    Don't you think the REAL terrorists, have people on the inside and have long since known this all?

    We'll no, the 'real' terrorists most probably DO NOT have people on the inside, they may not even have people at that location, so if they can download that off the internet, all the better.

    Don't you think the REAL terrorists, have people on the inside and have long since known this all?

    Oh, ok, so then you might as well not do anything at all to try to protect your country.

    After all, if you try to fix up one area, they are just going to attack you in another area. So by that logic you might as well open all your borders, to anyone, let anyone purchase explosives, and just sit back and wait for the end to come.

    So if you cant stop ALL attacks, you might as well not bother trying to catch any.. After all it's costing your money !!!!... great logic.. :)

    They would want to concentrate on areas you don't hear about on a friggin' DAILY basis... simple logic. Too bad government has no concept of such things.


    LOL,, good idea, love that logic, spend all your efforts in the area's where the security issue is not an issue, where the terrorists DO NOT operate..

    that will be SO MUCH more effective !!!

    Im sure the Government understands it far better than you, and that is exactly why they are not putting all their effort into icecream stand bombers..

    So instead of making flying a bit safer, they should be spending billions of dollars in deep background checks on all icecream stand vendors, employing icecream stand marshalls, x-ray scanners for the icecream, pat down's and chemical analysis !!!..

    Sorry get a grip will you !!!..


    Maybe you can suggest what area's they should be working on that you do not hear about on a daily basis ? the icecream stands ? for example... name some.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  78.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 9:52pm

    Re: Re: Parallels the tech industry

    Hmm... should I listen to some idiot on the Internet claim security through obscurity works wonders, or listen to experts like Bruce Schneier argue security through obscurity does not work? I know which one I'm going with.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  79.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 9:56pm

    Re: Re:

    "What is sounds like is that you are just rattling off opinions are statements that you really do not yourself understand, trying to string them together, to form something coherent.. But it did not work out."

    That's funny, cause that's the impression I get when I read your own posts.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  80.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 10:02pm

    Re: Re: Freedom isn't Free.. you pay a high price for freedom

    How old are you? Twelve?

    On second though, never mind. Most twelve year olds are a great deal more mature than you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  81.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 10:05pm

    Re: To Darryl: please try spell check sometime. Too bad that won't help much!

    "Hey, Darryl. Looks like you're off your meds again! Your furious posting pace, liberally strewn with spelling, grammar, and syntax errors makes me think that you are actually good old Scott, three sheets to the wind, or maybe off his anti-psychotic meds, or perhaps both. Congratulations! You have achieved new heights, or perhaps depths in illogic, incoherence, and idiocy!"

    My thoughts exactly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  82.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 26th, 2010 @ 10:10pm

    Re: Re:

    It must make you feel like a big boy to engage in this sort of abusive behavior. How pathetic.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  83.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 26th, 2010 @ 11:49pm

    Re: Re: This kinda BS

    One thing that really bugs me about the whole thing is they took his state issued license to carry a concealed weapon.

    Unfortunately, California is a "may issue" state. As a result, the Sheriff can take away a CCW for any reason, including no reason. Thank the bleeding hearts who rather Californians are victims of crime and not able to fight back (because the criminals have rights too...?!?!) Every time they've tried to force "shall issue" through the law, the bleeding hearts shut them down. If it was up to them, the only people in California with guns would be the criminals.

    For the most part, in California, when it comes to CCWs, the Sheriff can make up whatever rules they want, and fairly often a new Sheriff will come in and revoke CCWs issued by past Sheriff's with no rhyme or reason. Often it is done as a political tool, so this isn't far from the norm.

    The sad thing is that this does nothing to help security when grannies accidentally shut down airports at random because no one thought to detain her at the checkpoint until the results of a scan were communicated back to them (despite the fact that no grannie in the history of the universe, at least the history we are aware of, has ever had ill-will towards an airplane and would want to destroy it.) What kills me, is the last time I flew, a grannie walked on the plane carrying an oxygen bottle!!! If that grannie had ill-will towards the plane, she could have easily destroyed it with the 5lbs of pure oxygen she had in that bottle. Security Theater, just like California's "may issue" laws, designed to infuriate the general public while the criminals and terrorists laugh (since they likely know all this stuff already, without posting it up to youtube.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  84.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 12:23am

    Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    Check also CA state laws (which are admittedly unclear) and local laws.

    Please provide direct citations to any California Penal Code which covers the law you believe to be broken here.

    I am very familiar with CA laws, and there is no such law (it is not clear because it doesn't exist.) There is no penal code in California to cover taking pictures at an airport, and the only code which could possibly be used here would be city municipal code for producing a motion picture for sale without a permit, and that would be a stretch.

    Filming or taking pictures in an airport in CA is not prohibited by CA law, except where Federal laws prohibit it, such as in the Customs and Immigration area in the International Terminal. And even then, it is only really enforced at the incoming lanes at the customs stations, as I've seen tourists taking pictures at the baggage areas with no problems at all...they only really seem to care when you take pictures around the customs officials themselves, or around the places where they are examining your documentation.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  85.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 12:43am

    Re: Re: Parallels the tech industry

    Encryption is security by obscurity, does that work ? hell yes..

    I don't know why I am feeding Darryl...but here it goes.

    Darryl, security solely through obscurity doesn't work, not even in encryption. Encryption is a form of security through obscurity, only in the fact that the key and the message are secret, but the encryption routine and the cypher-text are not secret (in a matter of fact, they can be freely transmitted anywhere.) As someone who has researched encryption methods in the past, let me assure you that any encryption routine which is secret should never be trusted, under any circumstances. Sure, the key and message must remain secret, but this isn't security solely through obscurity at all...the encryption routine likely protects the message and key from exposure through the cypher-text because it relies on information which is extremely difficult to guess or brute-force, such as extremely large prime numbers or elliptical curves. You have access to most of them with a computer, but it would take you a really long time to try them all. Math is what secures encryption, not the algorithm.

    As for VMS hacks, just because you aren't aware of any, doesn't mean that they don't exist. And if you believe that running VMS will save you from all attacks, feel free to publicize your DECnet address and we'll see how secure your system really is (hint: it isn't.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  86.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 12:53am

    Re: Re:

    By your logic someone dhould post a sign on your windshield everytime you forget to lock you door?

    I, for one, would welcome that. If it gets me to think about my own security, then good. The problem is that most people around here would just go through my stuff or steal my car (which is a painful, and far less desirable, but still a very effective way to get me to think about my own security.) At least with the sign I might see it and do something about it before someone else did. I wouldn't, however, ask the police to arrest the person who writes the sign, but hell, if you feel it is better to shoot the messenger for your mistake, knock yourself out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  87.  
    identicon
    wifezilla, Dec 27th, 2010 @ 2:41am

    Re: Re: Freedom isn't Free.. you pay a high price for freedom

    What type of food are we? I am felling kind of "peanut butter cup-ish" at the moment.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  88.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 27th, 2010 @ 6:09am

    Re: Re: The System Works

    No...the system didn't work. The passengers worked. They beat the tar out of the would-be-terrorist AFTER he made it through the superfluous security checkpoints. Take a look at Israel's airport security vs. their incidents of security breech. They learned a long time ago that machinery, no matter how fancy, cannot make the intuitive judgement calls that a vigilant person can. If you really think the system works then I would have to say that you are a TSA stooge. Think before you comment, Einstein.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  89.  
    identicon
    Darryl, Dec 27th, 2010 @ 6:14am

    Re: Re: Re: Parallels the tech industry

    but the encryption routine and the cypher-text are not secret (in a matter of fact, they can be freely transmitted anywhere.

    IF as you have said you have researched encryption systems, then you would be aware that MOST encryption systems ARE NOT FREELY TRANSMITTED EVERYWHERE..

    And the specific keymat, for that encryption key is also not freely available.

    It's very hard to decrypt a signal, if you do not even know the method of encryption.

    If as you claim, you have researched encryption systems, you will not about things like Token chains, and how they are variable bit lengths, certainly not freely available, in fact its the MOST secret information there IS !!!..

    As you well know, if something is "traffic flow secure" that you encryption machine spits out data all the time, continuous flow of data, if you look at that data, you can not tell if the data is false, or random information for if the data is a signal, or message. and therefore you cannot tell the start or finish of that message. (that is security by obscurity at its ultimate)..

    So you cannot brute force the 'encoded' message, because you simply cannot tell what is message, and what is random code, decrypt the entire stream, a massive amount of data, and that would be impossible..

    As well as all that, the very important messages will be multiple encrypted, first by the creator of the message, on a desktop message encryption machine, he will then send that to the signal's room, who will encrypt the allready encrypted message with a non trafic flow secure encryption, and that allready twice encrypted message, will enter the que to be fed into the main signal trunk, that is fully traffic flow secure, and the key mats chanaged VERY regularly..

    Far too often for any supercomputer to work out what the keymat is before it is changed..

    So again, you are simply wrong if you think it is not security by obscurity..

    As for VMS, I asked you to find a hack, and you're reply is "if it was less obscure, it would be able to work something out !!!! ".

    In otherwords, yes, security by obscurity does work, and the only way you can show that it does not, it by making it NOT obscure !!!.. nice one..

    You shoot down your own argument, I love it when that happens.

    I bet if you had 1000 years, and a VMS system all to yourself, you would not be able to gain supervisor rights to the system through some hack.. and even if you did, you are the ruler of your own world.. VMS stands for virtual memory system.. That means you are ON YOUR OWN, when you log onto a VMS system.

    And as far as you are concerned you have 100% system resources. but only what you are allowed to have.. you have 100% of your own world.. and zero of anyone elses.

    But if you think you are a master hacker, I invite you to show me that you are not talking bullshit.. At least explain a little about the VMS OS, so we know you are not talking out your ass :)..


    And perhaps you need to do a little bit more than read a popular science article on encryption, and call yourself an expert.. because it does not make you an expert...

    Even try to explain what RED and BLACK mean in the encryption world ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  90.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 10:25am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Parallels the tech industry

    Even try to explain what RED and BLACK mean in the encryption world ?

    Sure, traditionally, red means plain-text and black means cypher-text in encryption networks, but red and black are also used in almost all models for security devices, where red is the area inside of control and black is the area outside of control of a security system. If you really don't understand the concept and are looking for help, the nice folks at Wikipedia have a nice discussion of it. Now, to your drivel...

    Most encryption systems ARE transmitted freely everywhere, you are mistaken in your belief that they aren't. Sure, there is an occasional idiot that creates a super-secret encryption routine but those are usually easily broken. And even your beloved one-time symmetric key encryption is freely available (hint: everyone knows how to perform XOR cyphers...you aren't fooling anyone.) The keymat, may or may not be freely transmitted (there is a whole realm of encryption where part of it is transmitted freely,) and usually in the case of it being transmitted, it is encrypted itself.

    As for VMS, it has a ton of meanings. VMS is traditionally used in the computer world when discussion Digital Equipment Corporations VAX/VMS operating system, which does mean Virtual Memory System, but just because it means that doesn't mean that DEC wrote their operating system to perform that way. If I can hack supervisor on your VMS system, I have control of your system and can do whatever I want on your system.

    However, since in your rants you do not seem to ever explain anything yourself beyond your popular science/people article reading of anything, I fail to see how anything you say is more than just pot calling kettle black. I choose not to post my credentials here, and as far as I've seen, you haven't either.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  91.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 10:42am

    Re: Re: Re:

    I gave reading Darryl's posts awhile ago...now they just make my mouse roller finger tired.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  92.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 10:44am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    err... gave up

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  93.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Dec 27th, 2010 @ 4:02pm

    Security? What's that?

    Isn't it true that the airport and border security are going after people linked to Assange rather than going for anything close to actual... ya know... Security?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  94.  
    icon
    HunterA3 (profile), Dec 28th, 2010 @ 3:06am

    There seems to be a lot of security "experts" here

    I'm not going to say I have all the answers, but I do have military training, counter-terrorism training, a former certified protection officer, and 14 years of security experience.

    Two things jump out at me from this video that should be apparent to anyone with a similar background:

    1 - Complacency Kills. That is point number one of the counter-terrorism training I received in the military and it seems to be the primary point of this video.

    2 - There should be concentric rings of security, which get more difficult to clear, as you get closer to the area you wish to secure. In this video, it is obvious that rather than making the tarmac more restrictive, it is actually one of the easiest areas to get to. At my home town airport, the terminal Burger King employees have access to the tarmac to take out the trash. Now tell me how is it that this is suppose to be a highly restricted area when you have the kid taking your burger order walking out where the planes and luggage are right there?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  95.  
    identicon
    Michael, Dec 28th, 2010 @ 4:11am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    I believe the initial response was for a citation about the actual law broken. The TSA has RULES about photography of the security areas in an airport, but I am not actually sure there is a law to be broken. They can certainly remove him from the airport, but coming to his house after the fact and taking away his legally owned and operated firearm is WAY outside the TSA's area.

    And...is it really illegal to take a photo of certain buildings in Australia? It is not in the US. If you can see it from a public place, you can photograph it here. Once you move onto private property, there are rules. Once you move onto a government-owned facility, there are rules. However, freedom of the press prevents the US government from making a law that prevents photography (arguably without sound) from any public location.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  96.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 28th, 2010 @ 6:08am

    Our government at work!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  97.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 28th, 2010 @ 12:06pm

    Re: Re: Re: Still Not Legal

    > Video has the ability to be accurately reviewed
    > multiple times, what a person sees cannot not be
    > reviewed accurately multiple times.

    None of which changes the fact that taking pictures and video in the public areas of an airport is NOT AGAINST THE LAW.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  98.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 28th, 2010 @ 12:10pm

    Re: He should be FIRED, and never be able to work in the security industry again.

    > Yes that is right, there is a law that prevents
    > viedo recording in an airport...

    Cite it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  99.  
    icon
    btr1701 (profile), Dec 28th, 2010 @ 12:15pm

    Re: He should be FIRED, and never be able to work in the security industry again.

    > The police, and court and the authorities, would
    > have had no choice but to remove him from his job,
    > take away any responsibilities in that area away
    > from him. And quite possibly put him in prison.

    And yet none of that has happened, has it? He's still employed, he's still flying planes every day. No one has even fired him, let alone arrested him and charged him with anything.

    Why?

    Because what he did isn't illegal. Thankfully we haven't reached the point in the US (yet) where one can be imprisoned merely for embarrassing government officials.

    > He just illegally recorded it (there is a good
    > reason why you cant record are airports).

    You keep saying this but there is no law against taking photographs or video in US airports. Hundreds of thousands of people do it every day.

    > The TSA does not need to continue to hire someone

    He's a pilot, dummy. He doesn't work for TSA. He works for the airline whose planes he flies.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  100.  
    icon
    keepingtheusasafe (profile), Jan 14th, 2011 @ 4:39pm

    I work at an aiport..I think the pilot could have got his point across another way. When you have a job at an airport you know you are not allowed to video or take pictures in the secure area. I think he should be discplined for this. There are rules for reasons.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This