After New York Attack, Congress Wants TSA to Secure Amtrak, Buses

Air travel is nice because there is basically one area that needs to be secured; once the plane is in the air, there's not much you can do to it. (Modulo 9/11!) I don't think the TSA does much (any airport employee can smuggle whatever they want into the secure area), but at least the task is theoretically possible. And, with air travel, the risks are higher; you can hijack the plane and use it as a missile. Trains run on tracks, so there is really no way the thing can take out the World Trade Center.

Anyway, this pattern of money grabs after botched terrorist attacks is depressing and distracts us from the real problems in New York City. Kids die every week walking to school because of people not driving carefully. Actual deaths. Kids. How do we react? By not filing charges, and by removing traffic calming devices because they interfere with parades. (http://gothamist.com/2016/08/29/nypd_safety_west_indian_para...) Are we going to address real problems, or are we going to waste our limited money on things that simply don't happen because the possibility scares us?

"A bipartisan bill introduced Thursday by Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) would require the TSA to use a risk-based security model for these transport modes and to budget money based on those risks. It would require a wider use of the agency’s terrorist watch list by train operators and more detailed passenger manifests along with tighter screening of marine employees. The legislation also would increase the TSA’s canine use by as many as 70 dog-handler teams for surface transportation."

"Lest you begin hyperventilating, it’s virtually impossible to envision airport-style screening detectors or security queues snaked around America’s train and bus passenger depots. “This is very much not creating for bus or rail transportation the [security] model that exists for aviation,” said Frederick Hill, a spokesman for the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which Thune chairs."

If you want to "opt out" without opting out, simply tell the TSA that you can't lift your arms above your head. They'll let you bypass the scanner - sometimes even the metal detector - and swab your hands.. and you're done. I've done it 20+ times in the last year. If they ever ask why, I say "it's a college basketball injury." I'm a 5'8" (1.72m).

And if you get really brave, you can try my thing "I can't lift my arms like this" while lifting my arms.

I have yet to be called on it.

Last flight I had some water left in my bag which I realized just before going through the security scanner. So instead of letting it go to waste, I thought it'd be best to quickly drink it. But I was stopped by a TSA agent saying it's a security risk and I'd need to either leave or give him the bottle clear bottle of water.

He had nonchalantly took it, he had no doubt it was plain water and threw it in a trash container full of other bottles. Kind of ridiculous, if they really thought a clear liquid was a liquid bomb or something, why would they give me the option of leaving it with it? And how could it possible be a bigger security risk for me to ingest it, than give it to them to put in the open

While it's not like it ruined my day, it's certainly enough to convince me the whole thing is a joke.

Trains and buses (to a lesser degree) do not share that attack vector. Trains ride on externally-controlled rails, and often depend on externally-provided power. Buses are slow, depend on roadways to reach any targets, and don't really offer any novel attack vectors vs. trucks.

We'd have to become a police state to even begin to protect every potentially sensitive area. You can kill people with almost everything and it is infeasible to prevent it altogether by force of arms.

This is needs to stop. Contact your representatives and tell them hell no.