Interesting. More anger at him them at the attempted hijacker.

I would be more angry that security hadn't been able to stop this guy than at this guy. Yes, he's being an asshat about it, but security isn't doing their job either.

I flew from Halifax to Toronto, there was a can of pop and a pair of scissors in my carry on bag. Security found and confiscated... my can of pop. They missed the scissors.

Good for the reporter. Too many people have their heads up their collective asses, and get angry NOT at the real problem (really pathetic security), but instead get angry at others for pointing out the problems.

Recently the TSA had a "test run" on security here at Tampa International. The 3 lbs of plastic explosive walked right thru in a carry on, but the kids toys that were deemed a hazard were found. Of course the supervisors here at T.I.A. were in spin mode after this.

I would rather everyone on the plane have a gun then just the one terrorist who smuggled it on-board.

The reporter was doing what reporters do... being an asshat and showing where there is news. A lack of security at an airport is news these days. I bet you the airport is checking bags now.

The lack of security at the airport is a valid news story... the fact that even so soon after an attempted hijacking, security was still lax just makes the point even more. Good on him for bringing the problem to light, those who are vilifying him for exposing the problem are a bunch of jackasses in denial.

travelingsurfer: I would rather everyone on the plane have a gun then just the one terrorist who smuggled it on-board.

Just what I was thinking, I would smuggle a gun on board just for protection.

If you're an Australian reporter, you can pretty much kiss the Pulitzer prize goodbye, anyway, since it's an American award.

travelingsurfer: I would rather everyone on the plane have a gun then just the one terrorist who smuggled it on-board.

That was the Archie Bunker Solution in 1971. Works for me.

This doesn't surprise me. They don't have regulated security in New Zealand.

/Obvious tag on vacation?

Bet he's a Democrat.

Bad_ad85: I flew from Halifax to Toronto, there was a can of popsoda and a pair of scissors in my carry on bag. Security found and confiscated... my can of popsoda. They missed the scissors.

/sory , pet peave

Reporters are supposed to be asshats, that's their jobs. The reporters I can't stand are the lame ass lapdogs that we have here in the US. No American reporter would have the balls to try what this New Zealander did, not a goddamn one.

Every-time I walk through he TSA line, I keep thinking about how all of this nonsense is the result of United Airlines being stupid. If their private security was a bit smarter back in 2001, none of this would exist today.

DON.MAC: Every-time I walk through he TSA line, I keep thinking about how all of this nonsense is the result of United Airlines being stupid. If their private security was a bit smarter back in 2001, none of this would exist today.

But who would have ever thought that putting locks on cockpit doors was a good idea. I mean, come on, putting locks on the doors that led into the cockpit of a plane.... where all the valuable and dangerous controls are.... why would anyone think that locks would be needed in such a situation?

It's not every day you get to see female hijackers. How refreshing!

/does she still get the virgins?

TheGreyPiper: travelingsurfer: I would rather everyone on the plane have a gun then just the one terrorist who smuggled it on-board.

That was the Archie Bunker Solution in 1971. Works for me.

That was technically legal prior to about '64. And even after carried-on materials were regulated by the Feds, there weren't x-ray scanners for a bit.

Flying armed was no more common than being armed anywhere else at the time, but it was just as legal. Most airlines didn't even have their own regs.

Yes yes..reporter got past "security" (small domestic flights have always been fairly insecure). You guys are acting like that is a giant weakness that needs to be exposed. It really isn't. But it'll result in more bad security measures that you'll complain about. More authority being given to low wage, low training grunts.

Our infrastructure is simply not designed to withstand all the possibilities.

I went through Auckland airport a couple of weeks ago. I had a tube of toothpaste and a roll-on deodorant, both in clear plastic bags. Security screener looked at half-tube of toothpaste and said since the tube was originally 110g it was over the 100g limit, even though it was obviously half-empty.
/How come you take my toothpaste but not this guys gun?
//Next time Ill hide my toothpaste in a gun, they wont confiscate it then

Uh... am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with this "lack of security" for planes with a capacity barely over that of a minibus?

Sure, crazy people with weapons are bad, and they're *really* bad on a 747 with 300+ people on it that can take down a skyscraper. But when it's a tiny vehicle with that few people on it, I don't think the time, cost, and bother of security can be justified.

I mean, if you can justify full bag screenings for planes carrying 20 people, why don't we screen all bags before letting people on a bus that carries twice that many people?