Has the TSA ever prevented an attack?

[mmmjvpssm]

Is that a valid question or a dumb question. Here's a hypothetical question. Suppose the TSA had been established before 9/11. Now suppose that on the morning of Sept 11, 2001 a couple of guys in Maine and also a couple of guys in Washington had had box cutters taken away. Would we have known that a terrorist attack was prevented?

 

[Full-Auto]

Is that a valid question or a dumb question. Here's a hypothetical question. Suppose the TSA had been established before 9/11. Now suppose that on the morning of Sept 11, 2001 a couple of guys in Maine and also a couple of guys in Washington had had box cutters taken away. Would we have known that a terrorist attack was prevented?

Impossible to say. Such a waste of money.

Another example of pussies seeking security at the cost of liberty.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'm sure at least one of those jars of honey or cans of shaving cream were for nefarious purposes.

 

[g5000]

There is no way to prove a negative. If the TSA were around pre-9/11, the hijackers may have stayed home. So the TSA would have been a deterrent.

The absence of a box cutter is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that hijackings were occuring about every 14 days just before metal detectors were installed in the 70s. They were so frequent that, "I'm hijacking this plane to Cuba!" was a common multi-purpose one-liner back then.

That figure immediately plunged to 1 a year, and some years have seen zero attempts, after metal detectors were installed.

Something to keep in mind when Libertarians say we should all be allowed to carry guns on planes.

I am still opposed to millimeter wave scanners. Once the President and every member of Congress have subjected themselves and their spouses and children to these scans, and published the unedited photos online, then I will remove my objections to them.

And now there are some anecdotal stories going around that TSA agents are picking out female hardbodies for special scanning by these machines. And if you pitch a bitch with the TSA, you earn yourself a place on their No-Fly list.

So now our paranoia has overreached and entered into tyrannical territory.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

There is no way to prove a negative. If the TSA were around pre-9/11, the hijackers may have stayed home. So the TSA would have been a deterrent.

The absence of a box cutter is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that hijackings were occuring about every 14 days just before metal detectors were installed in the 70s. They were so frequent that, "I'm hijacking this plane to Cuba!" was a common multi-purpose one-liner back then.

That figure immediately plunged to 1 a year, and some years have seen zero attempts, after metal detectors were installed.

Something to keep in mind when Libertarians say we should all be allowed to carry guns on planes.

I am still opposed to millimeter wave scanners. Once the President and every member of Congress have subjected themselves and their spouses and children to these scans, and published the unedited photos online, then I will remove my objections to them.

And now there are some anecdotal stories going around that TSA agents are picking out female hardbodies for special scanning by these machines. And if you pitch a bitch with the TSA, you earn yourself a place on their No-Fly list.

So now our paranoia has overreached and entered into tyrannical territory.

How many planes would have been hijacked if every other passenger on that plane had a gun?

 

[Claudette]

None.

The dirtbags would have been full of holes and on their way to meet allah.

 

[g5000]

There is no way to prove a negative. If the TSA were around pre-9/11, the hijackers may have stayed home. So the TSA would have been a deterrent.

The absence of a box cutter is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that hijackings were occuring about every 14 days just before metal detectors were installed in the 70s. They were so frequent that, "I'm hijacking this plane to Cuba!" was a common multi-purpose one-liner back then.

That figure immediately plunged to 1 a year, and some years have seen zero attempts, after metal detectors were installed.

Something to keep in mind when Libertarians say we should all be allowed to carry guns on planes.

I am still opposed to millimeter wave scanners. Once the President and every member of Congress have subjected themselves and their spouses and children to these scans, and published the unedited photos online, then I will remove my objections to them.

And now there are some anecdotal stories going around that TSA agents are picking out female hardbodies for special scanning by these machines. And if you pitch a bitch with the TSA, you earn yourself a place on their No-Fly list.

So now our paranoia has overreached and entered into tyrannical territory.

How many planes would have been hijacked if every other passenger on that plane had a gun?

The reality is that planes were being hijacked every 14 days, on average, when everyone was allowed to carry.

So that obviously wasn't working out.

Unless you want to visit Cuba for the price of a ticket to Boston from New York.

 

[g5000]

In case you guys think I'm full of shit:

The skies remained relatively quiet until February 21, 1968, when a fugitive forced a DC-8 plane to fly to Cuba. This started a rash of hijackings in the United States that would last through 1972. Worldwide, the U.S. Department of Transportation placed the total number of hijackings from 1968 through 1972 at 364.

In early March 1972, the discovery of bombs on three airliners led President Nixon to speed certain FAA rulemaking actions to tighten airline security. In October, however, four hijackers bound for Cuba killed a ticket agent. The next month, three criminals seriously wounded the copilot of a Southern Airways flight and forced the plane to takeoff even after an FBI agent shot out its tires. These violent hijackings triggered a landmark change in aviation security. In December, the FAA issued an emergency rule making inspection of carry-on baggage and scanning of all passengers by airlines mandatory at the start of 1973. An anti-hijacking bill signed in August 1974, sanctioned the universal screening.

Aviation Security

 

[Full-Auto]

There is no way to prove a negative. If the TSA were around pre-9/11, the hijackers may have stayed home. So the TSA would have been a deterrent.

The absence of a box cutter is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that hijackings were occuring about every 14 days just before metal detectors were installed in the 70s. They were so frequent that, "I'm hijacking this plane to Cuba!" was a common multi-purpose one-liner back then.

That figure immediately plunged to 1 a year, and some years have seen zero attempts, after metal detectors were installed.

Something to keep in mind when Libertarians say we should all be allowed to carry guns on planes.

I am still opposed to millimeter wave scanners. Once the President and every member of Congress have subjected themselves and their spouses and children to these scans, and published the unedited photos online, then I will remove my objections to them.

And now there are some anecdotal stories going around that TSA agents are picking out female hardbodies for special scanning by these machines. And if you pitch a bitch with the TSA, you earn yourself a place on their No-Fly list.

So now our paranoia has overreached and entered into tyrannical territory.

How many planes would have been hijacked if every other passenger on that plane had a gun?

The reality is that planes were being hijacked every 14 days, on average, when everyone was allowed to carry.

So that obviously wasn't working out.

Unless you want to visit Cuba for the price of a ticket to Boston from New York.

Really. What year was that?

 

[g5000]

If everyone were packing on a plane, I don't think a shootout in the skies would end well.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

There is no way to prove a negative. If the TSA were around pre-9/11, the hijackers may have stayed home. So the TSA would have been a deterrent.

The absence of a box cutter is impossible to know.

We do know, however, that hijackings were occuring about every 14 days just before metal detectors were installed in the 70s. They were so frequent that, "I'm hijacking this plane to Cuba!" was a common multi-purpose one-liner back then.

That figure immediately plunged to 1 a year, and some years have seen zero attempts, after metal detectors were installed.

Something to keep in mind when Libertarians say we should all be allowed to carry guns on planes.

I am still opposed to millimeter wave scanners. Once the President and every member of Congress have subjected themselves and their spouses and children to these scans, and published the unedited photos online, then I will remove my objections to them.

And now there are some anecdotal stories going around that TSA agents are picking out female hardbodies for special scanning by these machines. And if you pitch a bitch with the TSA, you earn yourself a place on their No-Fly list.

So now our paranoia has overreached and entered into tyrannical territory.

How many planes would have been hijacked if every other passenger on that plane had a gun?

The reality is that planes were being hijacked every 14 days, on average, when everyone was allowed to carry.

So that obviously wasn't working out.

Unless you want to visit Cuba for the price of a ticket to Boston from New York.

Was everyone allowed to carry guns on the plane, or was it just easier to smuggle guns onto planes? The truth is that it's not the libertarian position to simply allow everyone to carry guns onto planes. The libertarian position is that it should be up to private airlines to decide what they allow onto their planes, and what kind of security they have. I think a reasonable form of security would be to have armed guards on flights, but I'm not opposed to allowing passengers to carry either. It's just that it should be up to the airlines themselves.

 

[g5000]

How many planes would have been hijacked if every other passenger on that plane had a gun?

The reality is that planes were being hijacked every 14 days, on average, when everyone was allowed to carry.

So that obviously wasn't working out.

Unless you want to visit Cuba for the price of a ticket to Boston from New York.

Really. What year was that?

See two posts back. 1968 to 1972.

 

[Ed Spacer]

None.

The dirtbags would have been full of holes and on their way to meet allah.

Amen to that,hell yeah.

 

[g5000]

Was everyone allowed to carry guns on the plane, or was it just easier to smuggle guns onto planes? The truth is that it's not the libertarian position to simply allow everyone to carry guns onto planes. The libertarian position is that it should be up to private airlines to decide what they allow onto their planes, and what kind of security they have. I think a reasonable form of security would be to have armed guards on flights, but I'm not opposed to allowing passengers to carry either. It's just that it should be up to the airlines themselves.

It has been a while since I researched this subject, but I do know airlines voluntarily started their own screening in 1970.

While that did decrease the number of hijackings, it did not eliminate them. I think the number dropped to 10 hijackings in 1972. So that works out to one hijacking every five weeks after airlines began their own screening. Does that sound satisfactory to you?

The most famous hijacker of all during that period was D.B. Cooper, in 1971.

 

[g5000]

In 1969 the number of successful hijackings and hijacking attempts of United States carriers peaked at 33 and 40, respectively. FAA, Office of Air Transportation Security, Hijacking Attempts on U.S. Registered Aircraft (Oct. 5, 1973). As the airport searches became more widespread and other aspects of the anti-hijacking program took effect, the number of successful hijackings dramatically declined to 10 in 1972, and, surprisingly, there have been no successful hijackings of a commercial airliner in the United States in over a year. Id.10 These statistics would seem to indicate that the total anti-hijacking system has had some considerable success.

In addition to firearms alleged and real used in 117 incidents, other weapons used include knives, razors, bombs, a hatchet, an ice pick, and a tear gas pen. FAA, Office of Air Transportation Security, Hijacking Statistics (Aug. 1, 1973) 14. In this age of miniaturization a bomb may be fashioned out of plastic and placed inside a shaving cream can with a firing device with no more metal than a small fountain pen. In other words, no practical inspection will be able to insure absolutely the safety of airplane passengers

United States v. Albarado, 1974

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Was everyone allowed to carry guns on the plane, or was it just easier to smuggle guns onto planes? The truth is that it's not the libertarian position to simply allow everyone to carry guns onto planes. The libertarian position is that it should be up to private airlines to decide what they allow onto their planes, and what kind of security they have. I think a reasonable form of security would be to have armed guards on flights, but I'm not opposed to allowing passengers to carry either. It's just that it should be up to the airlines themselves.

It has been a while since I researched this subject, but I do know airlines voluntarily started their own screening in 1970.

While that did decrease the number of hijackings, it did not eliminate them. I think the number dropped to 10 hijackings in 1972. So that works out to one hijacking every five weeks after airlines began their own screening. Does that sound satisfactory to you?

The most famous hijacker of all during that period was D.B. Cooper, in 1971.

But was it legal for every person to bring a gun onto an airplane? I don't believe that for a second.

 

[g5000]

Was everyone allowed to carry guns on the plane, or was it just easier to smuggle guns onto planes? The truth is that it's not the libertarian position to simply allow everyone to carry guns onto planes. The libertarian position is that it should be up to private airlines to decide what they allow onto their planes, and what kind of security they have. I think a reasonable form of security would be to have armed guards on flights, but I'm not opposed to allowing passengers to carry either. It's just that it should be up to the airlines themselves.

It has been a while since I researched this subject, but I do know airlines voluntarily started their own screening in 1970.

While that did decrease the number of hijackings, it did not eliminate them. I think the number dropped to 10 hijackings in 1972. So that works out to one hijacking every five weeks after airlines began their own screening. Does that sound satisfactory to you?

The most famous hijacker of all during that period was D.B. Cooper, in 1971.

But was it legal for every person to bring a gun onto an airplane? I don't believe that for a second.

Was it legal? I don't know. But everyone could.

It was legal for pilots to carry guns until about 1987.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It has been a while since I researched this subject, but I do know airlines voluntarily started their own screening in 1970.

While that did decrease the number of hijackings, it did not eliminate them. I think the number dropped to 10 hijackings in 1972. So that works out to one hijacking every five weeks after airlines began their own screening. Does that sound satisfactory to you?

The most famous hijacker of all during that period was D.B. Cooper, in 1971.

But was it legal for every person to bring a gun onto an airplane? I don't believe that for a second.

Was it legal? I don't know. But everyone could.

It was legal for pilots to carry guns until about 1987.

So basically whereas you had law abiding citizens who would not bring their guns on the plane, you had criminals who were willing to smuggle guns onto planes in an attempt to hijack them. Seems to prove the old adage that "if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns" true, don't you think?

 

[g5000]

As I said earlier, I seriously doubt a shoot-out in the skies with passengers blazing away would end well. And I say that as someone with a concealed carry permit and as a marksman.

The screening process halted hijackings in their tracks.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

As I said earlier, I seriously doubt a shoot-out in the skies with passengers blazing away would end well. And I say that as someone with a concealed carry permit and as a marksman.

I don't see it as being very likely there would be a shootout. More likely the side with the guns, or the side with the most guns gets their way.