back to article US laptops-on-planes ban now applies to just one airport, ends soon

The United States' ban on laptops being carried into airliner cabins is all-but-over, after the nation's Transport Security Administration reduced its list of dodgy airports to just one and signalled that destination awaits inspection before also disappearing from its list. The ban was imposed in March after the Administration …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Minneapolis

    That one airport should be Minneapolis, that fails 95% of its security checks.

    But seriously: if there was to be a ban, it would have to be ALL airports to be effective.

    Otherwise, just travel to another airport and embark there.

    The kind of thinking behind the ban makes me doubt the competency of the people in charge.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Coffee/keyboard

      "The kind of thinking behind the ban makes me doubt the competency of the people in charge."

      Hahahahahahahahahahaha

      Damm that must have been difficult to type with a straight face.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Riyadh

    Ironically Riyadh has really strict security checks on arrival.

    They have x-ray screening of all incoming baggage at customs and took apart my wireless keyboard because it had batteries in it.

    I assume they are looking for alcohol, porn and bacon - but they did seem quite excited that the keyboard might be a bomb, carefully smuggled off the plane to blow up a desert.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Riyadh

      What sort of keyboard can contain alcohol, porn and bacon?

      Asking for a friend.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Riyadh

        What sort of keyboard can contain alcohol, porn and bacon?

        A Roland?

      2. DropBear Silver badge

        Re: Riyadh

        More importantly, why on Earth would anyone want to go to a place without alcohol, bacon or porn?!?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Riyadh

          More importantly, why on Earth would anyone want to go to a place without alcohol, bacon or porn?!?

          And lo the call did go out from senior management.

          Are any of you developers not Jewish ?

          Want to go and demo some kit to a big customer?

          I was the only foreskin positive guy who knew enough tech to get the kit working.

          1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Riyadh

            "I was the only foreskin positive guy who knew enough tech to get the kit working."

            Wasn't there a fad for circumcision in the US some years ago? Is it still a thing? They can't all be Jewish.

            Ah, here we go. It sounds like someone is making unwarranted assumptions.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Wasn't there a fad for circumcision in the US some years ago

              Circumcision was the default for the American male for a long period - still may be for all I know.

              When I went to school in England as a boy, we had no idea what circumcision was - we just figured that was the difference between Americans and Englishmen. Not to be jingoistic, but I preferred the fit, athletic look of mine.

        2. Swiss Anton
          Pint

          Re: Riyadh

          I wouldn't want to go to a place without alcohol, bacon AND porn, and all at reasonable a price too. (This rules out Sweden, porn yes, bacon, well its next to Denmark so probably yes, but beer, have you seen the cost of beer in Stockholm!)

          Beer icon because El Reg only allows one icon, and in any case there isn't an icon for bacon or porn (well there may be an icon for porn, but the libel laws prevent me from suggesting one)

    2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      "Ironically Riyadh has really strict security checks on arrival."

      Highly, given how many of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi nationals.

      Still no plans to implement this security farce vital security protocol on US internal flights however, which all the 9/11 flights were.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: "Ironically Riyadh has really strict security checks on arrival."

        "Highly, given how many of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi nationals."

        And all those people attempting to take guns onto aircraft at US airports are mainly US nationals. This makes one wonder if US airport security meets the standards they are enforcing on the rest of the world and how many guns are not detected and make it onto US domestic flights.

        We keep hearing how incompetent the TSA are yet they are discovering many guns every week. If they are so incompetent, they may be missing 100's every week.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Riyadh

      They have x-ray screening of all incoming baggage at customs and took apart my wireless keyboard because it had batteries in it.

      That's because your batteries were charged with electricity.

      /coat

    4. phuzz Silver badge
      Paris Hilton

      Re: Riyadh

      Wouldn't a woman with visible ears be porn by Saudi standards?

      1. Graybyrd
        Windows

        Re: Riyadh

        Wouldn't a woman with visible ears be porn by Saudi standards?

        Only if they're hairy.

    5. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: Riyadh

      "I assume they are looking for alcohol, porn and bacon"

      Drugs. So they can behead a few more prisoners...

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Guns

    It's kind of weird that the gun stats were thrown into this article. More than likely, these poor people who are probably now facing federal criminal charges completely forgot that they even had a loaded gun in their bag. It's completely legal to check an unloaded gun into your baggage, so forgetfulness is really the only logical explanation.

    Loaded chamber or not, the chances of the round going off are incredibly slim. Most modern firearms have a firing pin block, and the ones that don't, like a Series 70 1911 usually have stiff springs and lightweight titanium firing pins, that make it close to impossible to accidentally discharge.

    These were all checked bags, so inaccessible during the flight. The far scarier number is the number of firearms that slimmed past TSA (in)security on somebody's person and/or carry on baggage. The published numbers from their own testing are abhorrent.

    1. WonkoTheSane
      Headmaster

      Re: Guns

      Article states these were guns found in carry-on bags, not checked luggage.

      1. gandalfcn

        Re: Guns

        "Article states these were guns found in carry-on bags, not checked luggage."

        But anonymous hacks paid by the NRA don't like facts.

        But they do seem to love guns and killing people.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Guns

      these poor people

      Not the case. Most of these are a case of a jealous wife. Show up home after a "business meeting" with a couple of long blond hairs on your suit and... suddenly... your gun ends up being packed into your briefcase (without you ever putting it there).

      1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

        Re: Guns

        @AC most of these are a jealous wife? Most? Keep repeating that and realise how dim this sounds.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Guns

      Right, so having spoken to a number of US airport security managers, none of them had the impression that guns in hand luggage was the result of forgetfulness. Sure, that's the excuse that's always given (I forgot, or, the wife packed my bag, etc), but mostly it was dumb ass lazy idiots trying out their luck.

      For a start, who would normally keep their gun in their carry on suitcase? "That's where I keep it" is bollocks.

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Grenade

        Friend of mine had a grenade that had the explosives removed he used as a paperweight. His son was playing with it one morning while he was packing, and it ended up in his carryon.

        Fortunately he was active duty National Guard at the time, and when he showed his military ID they believed him when he explained it must have been his son. But he still lost out - they kept it!

    4. Khaptain Silver badge

      Re: Guns

      From the kind of guns used and their size, almost all appear to be concealable small firearms. Glocks 26s and small revolvers are not the kind of gun you would use in a mass shootout, far too few munitions. None of the magazines look to be of high capacity so I presume that they were just for self-defence.

      What does surprise me though is why they have a round chambered when entering an aircraft. As mentioned above, the chances of a gun going off are approximately zero until you put it into the hands of an idiot, at which point the odds go drastically up.... and I can't really imagine just how small the odds of stepping into a shooting match at 10000 feet are, but they must be pretty damned small.

      And even if there was a "situation" I am not sure that I would want to pull the trigger inside a pressurised aircraft... I have no idea but I imagine that a 9mm wouldn't actually go through an aircraft window but I wouldn't like to be the one that tries and then finds out that it can... Darwin's law would probably play a strong role here...

      As much as I am Pro-Self Defense, I don't really agree with the idea of guns in the cabin.. I was absolutely amazed though at a number of firearms found per period...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Guns

        "As mentioned above, the chances of a gun going off are approximately zero until you put it into the hands of an idiot, at which point the odds go drastically up"

        So gun manufacturers are doing their bit for population control by giving guns to Americans?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Guns

        "As much as I am Pro-Self Defense"

        By owning / carrying a gun, you make yourself much more likely to die from one - and so maybe Darwinian evolution will eventually solve the American gun problem...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Guns

          @Anonymous Coward: "By owning / carrying a gun, you make yourself much more likely to die from one"

          And by applying your "logic", owning a sharp knife makes me more likely to die from one....

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Guns

            "And by applying your "logic", owning a sharp knife makes me more likely to die from one...."

            That owning a gun increases your risk of dying from one is not based on logic, but on facts, as per numerous studies on the subject:

            https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24054955

            https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2014/01/111286/access-guns-increases-risk-suicide-homicide

            https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/160/10/929/140858/Guns-in-the-Home-and-Risk-of-a-Violent-Death-in

    5. John H Woods Silver badge

      Re: Guns

      "It's kind of weird that the gun stats were thrown into this article"

      Indeed, increasingly few news publications understand the importance of context.

      1. Bloodbeastterror

        Re: Guns

        "the importance of context"

        What does this mean? Potentially-dangerous objects being carried on to planes *is* the context.

        People trying to defend the gun side are obviously Americans. No further comment needed.

        1. John H Woods Silver badge

          Re: Guns

          "What does this mean? Potentially-dangerous objects being carried on to planes *is* the context." -- bloodbeastterror

          That's exactly what I meant ... one of the great things about El Reg is that it's one of the few publications that bothers with context whilst others sensationalise terrorist threats, Tesla crashes, SpaceX failures, vaping "risks" etc.

          Perhaps I should have used a <sarc> tag...

    6. Richocet

      Re: Guns

      The article says that these were all in carry-on bags so would have been accessible during flight.

      That's why guns were thrown into this article. To highlight the cognitive dissonance of being concerned about people smuggling bombs in laptops when 70+ people a day try to take firearms into the cabins of planes. Also perhaps to highlight how Americans are desensitised to the risk posed by guns.

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: Guns

        "Americans are desensitised to the risk posed by guns."

        no, the rest of the world is OVER-sensitized into perceiving a tool for self defense as an evil instrument of death from hell just WAITING to inflict injury on some innocent person... (like the evil gun controls the owner or something)

        (That, and a lot of idiots in California and New York, "oversensitized" like that)

        Technically, though, a 'gun' doesn't have rifling, like a shotgun. So mostly it's rifles and pistols. But yeah, I'll call them "gun" for the sake of those who aren't familiar with that distinction. It's not like I'm in boot camp and the drill instructor is going to make me run around all of the barracks holding my rifle above my head in one hand, and my family jewels in the other, saying "This is my rifle. This is my gun. This is for fighting. This is for fun!" because I called my rifle a "gun".

        1. Def Silver badge

          Re: Guns

          ...perceiving a tool for self defense as an evil instrument of death...

          A gun is not a defensive weapon. You're confusing them with bullet proof vests, and/or castles.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Guns

            "A gun is not a defensive weapon. You're confusing them with bullet proof vests, and/or castles"

            Where would you include Martial Arts ? As both a previous practitioner of Martial Arts and as a current "Sports Shooter" I personally don't see the difference when used defensively or offensively Both are deadly. When used properly, with restraint and with sufficient self-control both can stop a small incident from becoming major incident very quickly... ( I also have professional training in defensive/offensive situations).

            Owning a firearm does not make automatically make someone a cowboy killer. I agree that there are idiots with guns but the majority of firearms owners are sensible people.

            Like most car drivers, most people are sensible but not all... I would also consider Drunk driving is far more dangerous than firearms, yet there are almost no controls to stop someone getting into a car absolutely blind drunk.

            1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: Guns

              "Owning a firearm does not make automatically make someone a cowboy killer."

              But are you the sort of person who would be carrying a loaded gun onto an aircraft and forget that you had it with you? I suspect not, but the sort of person who does do that is far less likely to be a well trained user. THAT is the problem.

            2. Def Silver badge

              Re: Martial Arts

              As both a previous practitioner of Martial Arts and as a current "Sports Shooter" I personally don't see the difference when used defensively or offensively...

              Good question.

              When fighting someone in unarmed combat, what's the difference between merely parrying incoming strikes, and actively attempting to knock out/disable your opponent with strikes of your own? Obviously you do need to strike at your opponent in an offensive manner to disable them, but there is still a clear distinction between just defending and attacking (albeit with a goal to disabling or preventing further attacks).

              Which was my original point: At the end of the day there is nothing defensive about launching projectiles at supersonic velocities towards someone else. :) You can argue the need to disable or prevent further attacks, but doing so with a gun is never a defensive manoeuvre.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Martial Arts

                "Which was my original point: At the end of the day there is nothing defensive about launching projectiles at supersonic velocities towards someone else. :) You can argue the need to disable or prevent further attacks, but doing so with a gun is never a defensive manoeuvre."

                Defence, in my book, is about ensuring your own and possibly other's safety. How this is achieved, I personally consider is less important than actually being successful in your goal. Were I to use a gun, a chair leg, a lamp, a stone or an appropriately placed punch is less relevant than securing the situation. With a gun, a distance can be maintained and hopefully a shot will land where intended should the situation escalate to that point. Pulling the trigger, throwing the stone etc should always be that last choice regardless of the situation...

                The general idea of using a gun is to enable and maintain a distance between yourself and the attacker. In situations whereby you are either much weaker than your opponent, ie you might be wounded, your opponent has a knife or other CQB weapon, or other more destructive means, your best chance of defence is to remain at a distance outside of their reach. We are presuming that we are in a situation whereby your attacker has the intention to cause damage/threaten life.

                The longer the gun the further that distance can be, up until the point whereby you don't have the skill to successfully hit the target. Handguns are great up to and around the 7m mark when you are "trained" and know to keep your calm. Even with practice with a qualified instructor in perfect conditions, it is surprising to see how many times we don't hit a target at 7m. My instructor does add stress but it is minor to what I imagine a real world event would be like..

                Many might consider that 7m is not far, but when you are trying to be accurate and hit a point of around 4 inches it's not so simple.... ( 4 inches is roughly the zone in which you will hit a vital organ, or a disabling point) Stress, movement, noise, excitement all make a huge difference.... It's difficult to do under perfect conditions, ie at a shooting range. Don't forget we are talking about analysing a situation, knowing who is who, what would be the results of missing your target, whats behind or beside your target, then reacting accordingly, unholstering your gun "if" necessary, then taking a decision to disable, possibly killing your target....

                By remaining at a distance you can "defend" yourself and possibly other without needing to put yourself into an unnecessarily dangerous position. The fact that you have a gun does not mean that it should be used, but in certain cases, it can also become a dissuasive, the fact that you have a gun and that your opponent doesn't can quickly calm a situation. Obviously, if he also has a gun then this is where things are likely to become nasty for all concerned... This is where it is vital to know what action to take and when... Sometimes it would be better NOT to pull out a gun....

                Guns are just another weapon in an arsenal, just as much as a brick or a punch or running away... Guns are extremely dangerous when used incorrectly, I am not accurate with a brick so in my case it is just as or even more dangerous than a gun....

                Defence in my book = ensuring one chance of survival... I agree though that is is a personal point of view.

        2. imanidiot Silver badge

          Re: Guns

          @bob

          umm, most of the world is mostly sensitive to idiots thinking that being allowed to carry a weapon in daily life means that it's a good idea to take it on an aircraft in carry-on luggage. Most of the world realises many people carrying guns in the US are way too stupid to safely do so. Most of the world realises it's a bad idea to just allow any untrained idiot to carry a gun. There are plenty of countries around the world where private gun ownership is perfectly possible. Most however are sensible enough to put some limitations on the minimum level of inteligence required to do so. Yes, some countries are more draconian than they should be (like the Netherlands) but given history it's not surprising. We don't actually fear our government like the average gun-toting numbnut in the US seems to do. So we don't need guns to prove to our government how much of a big boy we are.

          1. gandalfcn

            Re: Guns

            Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun crime in the world. In 2014 there were just six gun deaths, compared to 33,599 in the US. What is the secret? No secret, it's called gun control. Septics of course say gun control doesn't and can't work. Amazing stupidity.

          2. OldCrow

            Re: Guns

            Do bear in mind that the americans have a good reason to fear their own government. The average U.S. police officer is likely to have zero firearms training on any sort of regular basis. So if a police officer draws a weapon and you stand still, you have a high risk of ending up collateral damage. And if you run to cover, you have a high risk of being shot at. So the only safe response is to shoot the police first. </joke>

            Jokes aside, unless TSA agents have a much stricter training regime than the american cops, you can't really hold them accountable for missing stuff in luggage. After all, with no education towards real explosives, you can't demand that they'd recognize one when presented. Nevermind something more exotic, like a properly hidden blade. So it is perfectly understandable that passengers would want to carry some extra security with them. On the off chance that the terrorists try to hijack the planes, like they did on 9/11.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              The average U.S. police officer is likely to have zero firearms training

              Used to know an ex-Navy Seal that provided fire arms training for one of the local police departments. His opinion was they shouldn't be allowed to carry guns.

        3. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge

          Re: Guns

          "no, the rest of the world is OVER-sensitized"

          Utter BS. Compare crime rates, and try to do so without some special pleading argument that the USA is somehow different from other developed countries.

          Let's compare the number of firearm deaths per 100,000 citizens shall we? UK 0.23, USA 10.54 .

          The overall homicide rate is something like 4.5 times more in the USA compared to the USA, you're also more likely to get robbed and more likely to get sexually assaulted, so guns aren't keeping you safe, you're more often the victim and you aren't saving yourself with defensive gun use by any measure.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Guns

            The majority of that number includes suicide by gun, which completely inflates the number. Taking away the gun doesn't end suicide, they just find other means to their end.

        4. Colin Ritchie
          Windows

          Re: Guns

          Rifle is a subset of the word gun Bob. A gun is a normally tubular weapon or other device designed to discharge projectiles or other material. Rifling is added to improve accuracy and range. Considering that the weapons found were in hand luggage, I would assume most of them were pistols (with rifling) anyway.

          Statistically, the presence of so many guns in the USA makes them far more dangerous to US citizens than the terrorists the laptop ban was meant to stop. While I assume you believe your 2nd Amendment rights are inviolate; I would suggest trying to disarm toddlers and banning lawnmowers, if you want to save more American lives, because they are killing more of your citizens than international terrorists, but still a fraction of the numbers killed by retaining the good ol' 2nd Amendment.

          http://dangerousintersection.org/2016/09/08/odds-of-getting-killed-by-armed-toddlers-terrorists-and-falling-out-of-bed/

          1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Guns

            "far more dangerous to US citizens than the terrorists the laptop ban"

            Has there ever actually been a "laptop bomb" incident or is this one of those "we have received intel so will ban laptops" things? If the latter, the terrorist just have to keep coming up with ever more ludicrous schemes, drop a hint to the "enemy" security services and watch the results as it "terrorises" the intended targets for little to no effort

            1. Alistair Silver badge
              Windows

              Re: Guns

              @ John Brown:

              After the whole yellowcake incident, that is exactly what they've been up to. Its how they won.

        5. Mr Commenty McComentface
          WTF?

          Re: Guns

          @ Bob

          Bob, cheers for clarifying "rifle" vs "gun" for those who aren't familiar with the distinction.

          Favour for a favour, I shall distinguish for you "over sensitised" with "an understanding of faintly responsible gun ownership."

          "Over sensitised" is a borderline manically paranoid response to a stimuli, for example, thinking that despite all the laws, you need (and are allowed) to pack a firearm into your carry on, that is not only loaded, but also made ready.

          "An understanding of faintly responsible gun ownership" means we get that you like guns, we know that guns are simply a tool but we tend to think that giving every yahoo who wants a gun, with limited checks on them and no training, isn't, perhaps, quite the best thing to do.

          Anyone, short of a sky marshall I guess, who thinks it's fine and dandy to bring a bloody firearm in their carry on onto a plane, and frankly I couldn't give 2 hoots whether it's loaded or unloaded at this point, is, IMHO a f***ing bellend and deserves being slung in the clink without being told why and left to guess why. Once they figure it out, then they can be released, given some basic bloody training in fireamrs (and Not Being A Bellend 101) and sent on their merry way.

        6. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Guns

          "the rest of the world is"

          Erm, sure - so the whole rest of the planet is wrong and America are correct?!

          "perceiving a tool for self defense as an evil instrument of death"

          Remind me how many die of gun shots in America each year versus say the UK?

          "to inflict injury on some innocent person"

          And how may of those US dead each year were accidentally or unlawfully killed?

    7. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Guns

      Surely a responsible gun owner never forgets that he or she is carrying a firearm.

    8. Christoph Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Guns

      "More than likely, these poor people who are probably now facing federal criminal charges completely forgot that they even had a loaded gun in their bag."

      Which is exactly the problem. They actually forgot that they were carrying a loaded gun? And this is what the USA considers is responsible gun ownership?

      A loaded gun is something to just shove in your bag and forget about? When you are checking through your bag before travelling to make sure you have everything, the detail that there is a loaded gun in there doesn't even register?

  4. GrapeBunch Bronze badge

    Second Amendment

    Americans think it is normal for Americans to carry firearms on board airplanes. Yes, they understand that it makes other people nervous. They in turn are nervous about armed non-Americans. But they view the disapproval of loaded weapon carrying Americans (did I say that right?) as a kind of technical foul. Yes, it's wrong, but only a little bit. Don't do that again, sir.

    Canada had bomb-checking of laptops decades ago, long before the Americans. They would swab the keyboard and other areas for traces of explosives. But AFAIR they stopped doing it quite some time ago. A sensible reason would be if they never after years found anybody carrying a laptop bomb. But in this wild world, it could just as easily be a nonsensical reason.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Second Amendment

      They would swab the keyboard and other areas for traces of explosives.

      In my experience that still happens from time to time at European airports, happened to me a couple of months ago. I've had my shoes trigger detectors just because I'd walked down a street where a car bomb had gone off several weeks before.

      Many years ago a friend told me that his brother had been stopped at airport security. Some detector went beep, and they then scanned all his hand luggage. They wouldn't tell him why at first, but after every item seemed to trigger the detector he was taken aside for an interview and asked "have you been in contact with explosives?". At that point he produced his reservist ID and explained that he was on his way home after having spent a week on a 'handling explosives' course...

      At least it shows that the detectors work.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Second Amendment

        "At least it shows that the detectors work."

        Well, some of them do:

        www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29459896

    2. Alistair Silver badge
      Windows

      Re: Second Amendment

      "Canada had bomb-checking of laptops decades ago, long before the Americans. They would swab the keyboard and other areas for traces of explosives. But AFAIR they stopped doing it quite some time ago"

      They had engineering documentation that essentially made the point that to do sufficient damage, most laptop bombs *would never be bootable* as a normal computer. They switched to "power it on so we can see it boot". Which, in a number of locations, they ask that your phone do the same. If it happens to be without power you loose it till you leave the location or get off the plane.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Second Amendment

        Had that in America - and this was years before the TSA.

        Turn on your laptop.

        It boots to a bash prompt.

        No turn it on!

        It is on

        I need to see it turned on !

        I eventually realise, type "startx" and move the mouse pointer around

        He is happy and lets me through. So remember kids, XFree86 stops bombs

  5. redpawn Silver badge

    Talked to a soldier once

    out of HNL. He said that he had been pegged by the TSA some years ago to bring through dummy grenades. The inspectors had them re-scan the bag until the training grenades were detected. Mission accomplished. Feel much better now.

  6. dbayly

    Meanwhile what's happening with the UK's ban ?

    I seem to remember that the UK imposed the same ban, following the US precedent. I've heard nothing about it since. Is it still in force?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Meanwhile what's happening with the UK's ban ?

      Hmm,, that was effective wasn't it... We were flying back from Dalaman (Turkey) just after the ban of electronics thicker than 15mm was introduced. I didn't fancy putting my powerbank into the bin - so put it into the pocket of a jacket, folded the jacket over and put it in my cabin bag. Of course, they didn't find a deliberately hidden item at the second security check at the gate.

      I was far more concerned about battery / battery packs placed in checked baggage which may malfunction during the flight - unseen, wrapped in flammable clothes, subject to abnormal temperatures and shock.... Lithium batteries, other than those in the Samsung Galaxy S7, fail in flight. Iirc a Bluetooth headset and laptop battery have failed in flight this year - only detected because they were being worn / in a cabin bag.

  7. scrubber
    Big Brother

    "TSA continues to find guns-a-plenty"

    Given how awful the TSA are at doing their ostensible job, it makes you wonder the number that are actually in the air within arm's reach at any time. Yet for some reason these 'dangers' never seem to materialise into hijackings or taking planes down. It's almost like the whole security thing is some kind of macabre performance intended to make us feel nervous about the potential dangers and simultaneously reassured that Big Brother the government is doing something about it...

    1. Baldrickk Silver badge

      Re: "TSA continues to find guns-a-plenty"

      macabre performance

      You mean, like some sort of... security theatre?

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: "TSA continues to find guns-a-plenty"

      scrubber - Well Said!

  8. Magani
    Black Helicopters

    What's in a phrase...

    "Evaluated intelligence indicates..."

    That seems like shorthand for "Fred in the back room has had a good idea...".

    Where's the proof that there were ever going to be exploding laptops? It seems to have magically gone back into the fairy dust / rocking horse excrement that it always was. I'm also glad to see the UK's 'Me too' knee-jerk reaction has quietened down.

    While the US isn't going to be on my 'must visit' list any time soon, I think I feel a lot safer without all the Li Ion batteries quietly warming up in the hold, away from any method of being extinguished short of arriving, along with the fireball remains of the aircraft, at high speed into the Atlantic from about 38,000ft.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I had a TSA inspector check my wrist watch on a domestic flight last month. I guess he want to make sure the second hand was moving. He also checked the clasp. I think he was looking for wires. Is that the latest security warning....C4 packed wrist watches?

    1. James 51 Silver badge
      Joke

      Well, James Bond did have a laser hidden in his.

    2. TheVogon Silver badge

      "I had a TSA inspector check my wrist watch on a domestic flight last month."

      Probably looking for devices like these: http://plugable.com/bands/

  10. Valerion

    The found lots of guns

    I'm more concerned about how many they didn't find.

    Someone I know quite well was part of the security implementation at Heathrow. They would frequently put things through as tests and not all were picked up by operators.

    And that wasn't the TSA who by most accounts are really rather incompetent.

    1. OldCrow

      Re: The found lots of guns

      Incompetent. Undertrained. Same difference. Or not.

      Remember that they might be decent people. They've just never seen a real explosive. Or a real gun. ...Oh, wait, they've seen the ones caught at the airport. Point still stands on the explosives.

  11. far2much4me

    Guns And Explosives

    A few year ago, a husband and wife shooting team were nice enough to do the score keeping and publishing on their laptop. Then they took a trip and TSA detected traces of explosives on the laptop. Apparently enough gun powder residue was transferred from the score sheets to the fingers and the keyboard to be detectable. The got a good grilling, but eventually convinced TSA about what must have happened. Since I assume the explosive detection detects oxidizing substances (e.g., nitrates, perchlorates, etc.), it occurred to me that fertilizing the lawn and garden could transfer enough nitrates to your shoes to be detected. So I became very careful about which clothes I wore to the airport. But I still wonder how many people get caught be false positives in airport security.

    1. James 51 Silver badge

      Re: Guns And Explosives

      It is obvious from the conduct and statements from the TSA they care not one jot about the people going through the airport or any number of false positives. It's false negatives that agitate them and it is better that 10,000 innocent people are punished if it reduces the risk of a guilty person showing up.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019