A comment like that deserved nothing less than a particularly extensive full cavity search.

Well said Harpy, Max Continuous, Gaza .. Nice to see a sense of proportion being expressed with well considered and articulate comments amongst the predictable 'Send him down' vindictive clamour.

Somebody has kindly answered for me, Harpy, I forget their "handle", but thanks.
The point here, I think, is that a police officer, and a reasonably senior one at that,should A) know the law, and B)in the present circumstances have enough sense not to break the law.
I would accept that 99.99% of pax would not know that they are actually committing an offence by "joking" about having a weapon etc etc in their possession, and under those circumstances a private bollocking by a uniform might suffice~if they continued to be unrepentant, then being denied boarding would probably prove both a sufficient and salutary lesson.
In this case, the individual most certainly should have known better. Even if he had a couple of pre-hol drinks, the fact that he was asked to repeat his remarks should have been sufficient warning that he had overstepped the mark. If he had enough alcohol to impair his judgement, then he should have been denied boarding anyway.
Sorry to drone on, but we in the industry are already suffering enough from "knee-jerk" reactions of various sorts, and writing this as an airline captain, I and the rest of my colleagues already see enough mindless behaviour by pax without having officialdom adding to it.

Max Continuous - quote 'All the security in the world wouldn't have helped prevent the recent atrocities'.

If there had been the same level of security over there as there is here in the UK then I feel sure that the terrorists would not have been so able to have achieved what they did.

The security at USA airports, internal or international has always been a poor joke and because of it the whole world now suffers.

Harpy - quote 'Have you all lost your sense of proportion? The worst he can be accused of is making an unwise remark out of frustration at having his pen knife confiscated. Hardly a reason for refusing him boarding. I suspect he might be a good man to have on board during an attempted hijack'.

There are signs at most if not all check in desks that state 'no jokes'etc, it is an offence'. No thank you there is no way on this earth that I would want a d--- head like him sat on the same airplane as me thank you very much.

A traffic cop, well that says a lot, there's a light on but nobody's home. A snior traffic officer in Brum recently got away with doing 45 in a 30 limit cus it was a medical emergency (he was going to the doctors). Yep he'll get away with it too.

If this so called POLICE OFFICER had been stationed at Mcr Airport I wonder how he would insturuct his fellow officers and the security men/women to act if Mr Average had done this??There seems to be one law for them and one for any others.

Do unto others as they would do to you, BUT DO IT FIRST :eek: :rolleyes: :confused:

I'm sorry, but in a time where nearly 7000 people have lost their lives, 150,000 people have lost their jobs and the world waits with bated breath, because of security breaches, I think that this person deserves what he gets.
p.s. I seriously hope that those people who think he should have flown after such a comment are NOT airline pilots!

[ 29 September 2001: Message edited by: Right Way Up ]

Would a traffic cop be aware of the laws of international navigation? I don’t think so. You guys are being somewhat tough on a cop who made an idle remark after he was harassed over his pocketknife. Sure, the remark was tactless but he did square-off by producing a valid police ID. That should have ended the incident.

One can only assume a breakdown in CRM between two law enforcement agencies ensued. That breakdown delayed a flight by forty minutes and stopped the cop and his wife from undertaking a vacation that was obviously overdue.

When you read the comments by “KEG”, a tale that is obviously colored with plenty of fictional license, it appears to reinforce the tacit suggestion of rivalry between the security guard and the cop. I guess this rivalry is based on the professional training that a cop undertakes in comparison to that afforded a ‘bouncer’ wielding a metal detector.

I would ask Keg – who are the…dickheads with too much power…? Sounds like the bouncer in this case.

Isn't the point being missed a little here? With some jobs, a sense of responsibility even when not actually in work is needed - like it or not it goes with the territory. A 15,000 hour pilot with the greatest flying skills in the world would expect to get the book thrown at them if they buzzed Buckingham Palace at 200 feet - the argument that they were no threat (in that case due to their ability to do it safely) would cut no ice. Likewise a police officer, particularly a senior one has a responsibility even when off duty not to ignore laws when they feel like it - or face the consequences. As others have said, saying it once is stupid, but to repeat it, and then to try and initimidate the security guard into backing off by flashing his warrant card is gross professional misconduct in my view.

PS: The point about wanting all pax to carry weapons to tackle hijackers is an interesting one. Presumably this will necessitate 2 channels at each security checkpoint, one marked for ordinary passengers ("is that Uzi part of your anti hijack equipment Sir? Yes - no problem, please proceed"), and one channel for terrorists ("I'm sorry sir, you will have to leave your nail clippers behind"). Hmmm - that could work!!!

Curious pax,

There is a big difference between a premeditated action – flying in a no-fly zone – and an idle comment made on the spur of the moment. My point was that the cop was just letting off a little steam (in a misguided sense) and he probably regretted it almost as quickly.

We all say things that we regret a little later and I feel that in this instance the outcome was an over-reaction. The more level headed replies from the likes of ‘harpy’ and ‘Max Continuous’ support this. And after all the issue has been further blown up by the media who would no doubt like to have a traffic cop on toast!

Max Continouus - I had to read your comment twice just to make sure I wasn't still asleep!! Arm everyone on the plane, including would be hijackers???? I think if I had a choice of being sat on a plane with everyone armed or everyone having gone through security checks and any weapons removed I would go for the latter. I am starting to think that the only reason you work at an airport is it gives you somewhere to park your spaceship...

Harpy - Agreed, they can. On the other hand though, a mate of mine used to work in Customs and to get the job he underwent very stringent proceedures - he was PV'd, neighbours, friends interviewed etc. He was also subject to random checks, although admittedly not as stringent as getting checked every time you walk in or out.

Julian.

I can't believe the amount of comment on this subject without knowing the facts. What exactly did he say? Was it for example "If you touch that pen knife I will shoot you". Or maybe it was "You will certainly find my gun with this good security you have here". If it was the former, he should have been given the full works. If it was the latter, the security officer should have replyed with an equally flipant remark and ignored it. Lets face it, being processed through the cattle market of todays air travel preliminaries with all the hassle it entails (and yes all of it is necessary) is pretty stressful and lets face it, if you find your nose hair clippers being confiscated by some little hitler behind a desk (which some of them are - yes we all have them) it is very easy to make a sarky remark and no doubt regret it immediately after. Allowances should be made by everyone in these stressful times.

Roundwego,

He is alleged to have said - "Watch it, I have got a gun".

Mount'in Man suggests that it should have been OK because he showed a valid police ID card. Guess it would have been lower profile if he hadn't done that! Why was he carrying his ID on a vacation? Do police have to carry an ID at all times?


:confused: :confused:

Max,
Are you serious? As "customers" we expect safe flights. That pays the airline industries wages. Agreed, been treated olike crap by security staff and crew is not on, but joking with someone about a gun, is not part of customer care. Let's see if Scotland Yard has a sence of humour if you walk in there, and announce you have a gun! As part of our fare should the passengers all have a go at flying the thing as well.
Get real!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

As a serving police firearms officer who tries to show the public how professional we are I say this to Insp Orr" Thank you sir,you f****** ****!"

Now that isn't professional!

Curious pax, Julian, who's talking about arming passengers? We're not talking about hoisting guns and daggers on unsuspecting passengers and crews, just allowing people to retain household implements that anyone might reasonably be carrying around on a day-to-day basis. Nail clippers, for instance. Bit of an over-reaction removing those, just possibly?

A colleague had a penknife removed from his flight bag going through security just minutes before being approached on the flight deck by a despatcher bearing an envelope containing five similar "offensive weapons" for safe-keeping on the flight deck for the duration of the flight.

As we're reminded above, flying is a "bloody serious business". There's no room any more for humour, or attempted humour, a smile, a giggle, a laugh, a titter, or a joke with an official within ten miles of any airport in the world. Just sad people everywhere going around with the weight of the world on their shoulders, scowling and casting suspicious glances at their fellow travellers. Heavy hearted, humourless souls. Pilots locked away in reinforced flight decks. Fear everywhere.

So we're all agreed. The terrorists have won.

Gents,

From a previous post in the "confiscated crew items" thread ....

From yesterdays news it is apparent that there was only one hi-jacker pilot per aircraft - the rest were the musclemen to prevent him being rushed by anyone else. Far easier for the pax/cabin crew to overpower the henchmen if they were in possession of something other than their fists n' feet, I would suggest.

A desperate shame that the poor souls onboard the Pittsburgh flight didn't have just a little more time available to them....

Max - you were talking about arming passengers.
Personally I would rather have everything taken off passengers then there is nothing to worry about in the first place.

And yes I do agree with you that taking a pen knife off a college then giving it him back in a brown ebvelope for safe keeping is a bit of a Homer Simpson. I don't think they had their 3 weetabix that morning.

Julian,

Without wishing to slide into pedantry here, there's a subtle difference between arming passengers and passengers being "armed". If we're not allowed a sense of humour any more, surely to God we can keep a sense of irony.

Years ago a man ex governor of Massachusets was at boston logan boarding a flight when he made a joke about having a bomb....he was detained 30 mins....i was in the security queue behind him and heard the whole thing...some people are not serious about anything...hope they get the picture now

What the hell does it matter whether this guy was a Cop, Dentist, Pilot or the cleaner from the local bank? Anyone who makes threatening comments or "jokes" regarding any security issues should be dealt with in the same way.....point blank refusal to fly, arrested and dealt with accordingly.

Some people happen to take airline & airport security very seriously, and if you think that the odd joke here and there is acceptable - think again about what has just happened, and could happen again at any airport, anywhere, anytime if we let it!

The same rule has applied for years in the UK - anyone who mentions they have bombs/guns etc as a joke or otherwise, do not travel.

Get real :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Max - armed is armed whatever way you look at it, don't forget that the hijackers were carrying box cutters, not something you would normally give a second thought to. You are advocating passengers taking on board syringes, etc!

I think flugpants sums it up, there is a time and a place for humour and in front of airport security when they have a very serious role to carry out, especially these days, is not the time to try and crack a 'weapons' related joke!

Call me grannified, humourless, whatever - but I wouldn't want to see another Sept 11th happen because someone brought a penknife, syringe, etc on board and used it on the cabin crew.

Julian.

Julian,

I don't think anyone wants to see another Sept, 11th period, howsoever caused. Since these awful events I venture to suggest that passengers are much more likely now to take matters into their own hands should there be the slightest possibility of such a happening ever again. Maybe the terrorists of the future won't need anything sharp or pointy to instigate their plans to take over the aircraft, rendering conventional security impotent, and in that situation wouldn't you feel safer knowing that your fellow passengers might have a fighting chance of staving off disaster by attacking the hijacker(s) with whatever they had to hand, just stuff people normally carry around with them, yes including penknives?

Would you, as a passenger, in the light of the WTC attack, be content to sit and freeze if someone tried to take over your aircraft, or would you fight like hell to save your life? Mightn't a penknife come in handy in that situation? There's a lot more passengers than hijackers, after all.

Otherwise, security guards might as well truss us all up in strait-jackets before boarding and have done with it!

Max, you clearly don't get the point that people are making.

If you allow passengers to have penknives, then you are allowing potential hijackers to have penknives. If you allow passengers to have hypodermics, you are allowing potential hijackers to have hypodermics. etc. etc.

If you allow any passengers to have a potential weapon that could be used to overpower a hijacker, you are allowing hijackers a potential weapon that could be used to overpower aircrew.

That having been said, as has already been pointed out, almost anything could be used as a weapon - a pen, a bunch of keys, a rolled-up newspaper with a few coins, etc. etc.

It is the height of stupidity to say that passengers should be allowed to carry these in order to attack hijackers. You either allow them to have them because they are lawful items to have in your possession, or you disallow them all and, as has been suggested, we admit that the terrorists have won this battle. But you do not "arm" (or allow to go "armed") passengers because they can overpower hijackers. That's the straight-line assumption of the gun lobby in the USA that says that criminals are armed, so everyone should be armed. There is no end to the madnes in that direction. That way there'll be an aircraft downed by breakup following explosive decompression within a year.

My personal opinion (for what it's worth) is that passengers should be allowed to have nail scissors, penknives, etc. since that is a normal item of hand baggage. Anything out of the ordinary such as stanley knives, screwdrivers, chisels, etc. shold either have to check them in hold baggage of have them confiscated.

As for overpowering hijackers, let's have no more talk of passengers being "armed". Whatever you think they might be able to take on board, you can assume they've got more of and more deadly than you happen to have mixed up with your toothbrush and make-up. The best weapon after Sept. 11th. is the will to live and overwhelming numbers.

Well put Hugmonster.

If Max needs any more proof - just seen on the BBC that apparently someone in the US calmly walked upto the front of a Greyhound bus and slit the drivers throat. Bus left the road and several dead.

Julian.

Granted guys, but I bet he didn't slit his throat with a pair of Nail Clippers!

No-one believes security is not a serious business, but there are DEFINATELY a bunch of power-crazy "security" officials (the ones that last week they were working for B&Q) out there at the moment with no sense of importance at all.

Yesterday was classic; while going to great lengths to take a pair of sissors from a Canin Crew's personal first aid kit, NONE of the crew's ID were checked nor was the crew bus even looked at. This is LUDICROUS and DANGEROUS.

The REAL danger here is that all this petty squabling over bomb jokes and nail scissors lures people into a FALSE sense of improved security when really key issues - vehicle checks, proper ID checks etc - are being overlooked.

This does not apply ALL the time - mostly ID's etc are checked - but surely the KEY measures like these have first to be achieved 100% of the time before we worry about plastic cutlery and nail scissors??

Throttleback - exactly!

Julian - No further proof is needed at all! The extra security at airports just helps to make travelling by air even more ghastly and dehumanising than it is already, and by implication you're now suggesting that these security checks should apply to all other forms of public transport as well.... buses, coaches, trains, at this rate the whole world is going to grind to a halt!

We have to face the fact that life is a very risky business despite our mummies trying to wrap us up in cotton wool and protect us from all the dangers lurking out there in the big bad world. You're talking about one coach trip out of all the millions which take place every day of the week. You just cannot legislate for everything, or we'd all be conscripted as security guards.......

There's most certainly a balance to be struck between curtailment of liberty and the convenience of the public.

Max - No implication at all, just making the point of what happens when you put sharp objects in everyones hands. Maybe if everyone on the bus had them as per your argument they could go round in turn and do each other by your implication!!!

I hardly think you can call air travel dehumanising. Its just a fact of life that if travelling on a flight you will have to go through security. Yes, there will porbably be jobs worths sometimes but, maybe I am lucky here, I have yet to really encounter one that really hacked me off. If you dont want to go through the screening then:

a) Drive - although you will have those nice border guards with machine guns to deal with.

b) Stay at home and watch Eastenders with a mug of Horlicks.

Julian.

I can't believe some of the posts i am reading. This police officer broke the law. He acted like a complete idiot. People were arrested for this kind of thing long before Sept 11. As for calling security guards "Hitlers" - he was a traffic cop....

Lets get it straight. Do you want security or not? It seems to me that guards are wrong if they do their job, and wrong if they don't. I have NEVER met a "Hitler" as a security guard. Someone suggested the police officer was provoked - ever thought that your own attitude might provoke a security guard (who is terrified of headlines like "Hitler missed my nail file")

Main question that the anti-security brigade have missed is: Why did he even have a penknife? Doesn't he read the papers?

As for Max Continuous' comment about WTC security - how do you sleep at night? That was the most insensitive thing i have ever heard

Julian - the dehumanising aspects of flying are many and varied and do not just concern security screening, but that's best left to another thread. Seems to me that very many passengers are doing exactly what you suggest and sticking to Eastenders and a mug of Horlicks.....and an awful lot of us are going to be without jobs before long.

Mr. Chips - sorry to offend your sensitivities, my point regarding the security people inside the WTC was made purely to show that even security people don't always know what's going to happen next or what's best for everyone else, albeit through no fault of their own. The essential point is that, however stringent security checking becomes, you cannot always prevent this kind of atrocity being committed by totally ruthless and uncompromising criminals.

Max - You are bound to get people taking alternative forms of transports after a major incident, it is not something unique to flying. People get worried when things like this happen. I think if they had a choice of everyone going through security and being held up for a few moments or just whisked through they wouldn not mind the wait.

Maybe you should start up a thread on how dehumanising air travel is as I would be interested to hear your points.

Julian.

Spot on there Mr Chips. People are talking about proportion, well it was a proportioned response to barr the man from the flight. Furthermore, he is a policeman and should know better, and therefore they should investigate him and see if this is the type of officer that they want in the force.

Granted, security procedures need to be improved when it comes to checking ID's and such (I think they are installing a imaging scan at a major US airport for that very thing) but to joke around about security anytime is bad, and after recent events, is just plain stupid.
I always listen to security, sometimes you do come across a jobsworth - well complain through the proper channels, but these people have a huge extra burden just added to their jobs - cut them a little slack and for heavens sake, don't try any wisecracks.

: DD :

Transatlantic passengers seem to be mostly journalists, armed to the teeth to show how useless airline security is. Perhaps they should be trained to disable hijackers.

Hard to have much sympathy with an industry that can't get its act together. Why confiscate stuff that can be bought after the security check? (I've seen that happen recently.) Airports still allow small stuff to be passed round the metal detectors without being checked (take a bow, Heathrow). And how many of those X-ray machine screens are actually being monitored these days? Makes you wonder what happens to hold luggage , where the public are't even there to be impressed.

I'll keep flying because the odds are still good. But not because I think improved security is now in place - it clearly isn't. Except that punters have to show up an hour earlier, presumably to force them to spend more time loitering in duty free shops in an attempt to make the whole shambles profitable.

I certainly feel safe from being trapped on a plane with some idiot running off at the mouth. But that's not really the point, is it?

To continue on the ID theme and the worry about cards getting stolen from hotel rooms etc., is it not about time that all airport that subscribe to the NASP had a coherent ID card system, so that a card that is good for doors @ LHR is also good @ ABZ and NWI, and these doors are backed up by a computer system so that when a card is reported stolen from a hotel room in London can't be used within a few hours to get through the gate at, say, Manchester without alarm bells ringing?

The added advantage would be that you CAN get back on board via the airbridge stairs after doing a walkround at an airport that isn't your home base, very little more expense than airports are committed to already, added security, etc. etc.

Deconehead
< If there had been the same level of security over there as there is here in the UK then I feel sure that the terrorists would not have been so able to have achieved what they did. >

I have positioned as pax from UK airports for many years (domestic and international - in uniform and plain clothes). Until 11th September, I usually carried a penknife. I never attempted to hide it and the security officers never once remarked on it. I have no doubt whatsoever that the terrorists could have succeeded here. The security authorities also have no doubt which might explain their over-reaction.

During the same period on numerous occasions I have been handed plastic toy pistols, water pistols etc that have been taken from passengers at check-in to be returned at destination. It was acceptable for the pax to carry small knives but not water pistols. I don’t blame the individual security officers for this as they are allowed little or no discretion.

Since 11th, not only have passengers been prevented from carrying anything that could be used as an offensive weapon but so have pilots who can no longer carry nail files, scissors etc. Several correspondents have already mentioned that we carry a crash axe on board. Perhaps the sight of a pilot with grubby fingernails, rampant nasal hair and wielding an axe will deter any would-be hijackers. Let’s hope so because the DTLR has not yet offered us any fresh advice on how else to deal with them.

The treatment meted out to Inspector Orr has done nothing to increase security. It might suggest to the less intelligent members of the travelling public that something is being done but it was an issue of passenger misbehaviour not security. And as far as pax misbehaviour goes it was a non-event. Any pilot reading this thread will remember numerous occasions when drunken or otherwise disruptive pax have been allowed through the gate by ground staff who lacked the courage to deny them boarding. By the time they are on board and the crew notices their condition, their bags are in the hold and the slot time is near. The captain then has to decide whether to off-load them and their bags, which will result in missing the slot, or take them and hope for the best. It would be a mistake to think that all captains would always off-load them. The problem of disruptive behaviour is serious and it needs to be dealt with but it is totally separate from terrorism. We don’t serve the cause of in-flight security by confusing the two issues. Inspector Orr was not a security risk. He had a bad day, he said the wrong thing and he suffered for it out of proportion to the offence.

Keg
< I took a half step back and was about to clock the bloke as hard as I could when I notice a bright police badge in my face and his smiling face behind it. >

Was it standard procedure to hit a passenger who was carrying a gun before asking him to explain? He wasn’t on board an aircraft and he wasn’t threatening you so why hit him? Why not just ask him to explain?

Julian
Positive vetting is no guarantee. A customs officer could be blackmailed into taking a weapon through security for someone else.

The Flying Gunman
Since you have resorted to personal abuse towards this unfortunate passenger, may I remind you that police firearms officers have been responsible for the untimely death of a number of innocent people over the last few years? I just thought you’d like to know.

"Since 11th, not only have passengers been prevented from carrying anything that could
be used as an offensive weapon but so have pilots who can no longer carry nail files,
scissors etc."

Sorry, this is not true. We're asked if we have them, but would they catch us in a lie? - mostly no. Changes in actual monitoring of passengers and carryon items are at best haphazard, some people are well briefed and have adapted. They get to the airport or gate to find other passengers still lugging huge carry on bags that are not searched.

If we do thwart a hijacking in the UK (and elsewhere), it will be because passngers fight knowing the alternative - not because security is suddenly able to combat a determined terrorist.

Oh really Harpy...Give me ONE example

The flying gunman
Here are two examples. More are available if required.

James Ashley, 39, was shot dead at point-blank range in front of his 18-year-old girlfriend by a police marksman during a raid on his flat in St Leonards, East Sussex, in January 1998.

In September 1999, Harry Stanley, 46, was shot dead as he was carrying a wooden chair leg in a plastic bag in Hackney, East London. The police had been tipped off that he was an Irish terrorist armed with a sawn-off shotgun.

The flying gunman:
This time I am forced to agree with Harpy. I believe that James Ashley was the poor guy in London who was B------ naked and unarmed at the time.

Do I trust a copper, not many these days, do I trust a traffic cop, even less. Just imagine, a traffic cop with a gun, NEVER.

A few years back at BHX airport an armed cop shot a female cop while pra----- about in the crew room-----rrrrrrrisky.
:D :D :D

Another point which seems to have been missed. Someone earlier quoted the Aviation and Maratime Security Act. Read it again, it clearly states that to commit the offence the person has to falsly answer a question put to him by certain classes of people. so for instance if you are carring something for someone else and denie it when asked at check-in then offence commited. So far no one has suggested he was asked anything to prompt the comment about the gun. It would appear to be a response to a pen knife being found. Please remember that up until the events in the US you could buy one in the duty free shops Airside at Heathrow...that is AFTER the security checks. He hasn't made any form of threat, mearly made a coment. So what criminal offence has been commited??? None as far as I can see. Now before everyone leaps on thier horses and starts having a go, I don't condone what was said. This all does however seem to be an over re action to a silly comment that 6 months ago and in 6 months time would have been ignored. Another thing to bear in mind is if it were any of you making the comment the whole thing would have ended there and then. Because this chap was a police officer, it will be investigated, with far more resourses used than would be if it were your 90 year old grans house that had been burgled and her beaten up. The end result will probably be a discipline board which could result in him losing his job for bring the force into distrupute. Would your union stand for that happening to you?

Not sure how we got on to this, but..

The guy who was shot carrying a chair leg, was carrying an object of the same size and sahpe as a sawn off shotgun. he was challenged by armed police and told to put it down. He didn't. I truly believe that the police are trained to tell the difference.

The other case quoted I belive involved a suspect firearms officer (previously suspended) and a very dodgy hierachy. Heads have rolled.