What Examples of Security Theater Have You Encountered?

swillden writes "Everyone who pays any attention at all to security, both computer security and 'meatspace' security, has heard the phrase Security Theater. For years I've paid close attention to security setups that I come in contact with, and tried to evaluate their real effectiveness vs their theatrical aspects. In the process I've found many examples of pure theater, but even more cases where the security was really a cover for another motive." swillden would like to know what you've encountered along these lines; read on for the rest of his question below.

swillden continues: "Recently, a neighbor uncovered a good example. He and his wife attended a local semi-pro baseball game where security guards were checking all bags for weapons. Since his wife carries a small pistol in her purse, they were concerned that there would be a problem. They decided to try anyway, and see if her concealed weapon permit satisfied the policy. The guard looked at her gun, said nothing and passed them in, then stopped the man behind them because he had beer and snacks in his bag. Park rules prohibit outside food. It's clear what the 'security' check was really about: improving park food vending revenues.

So, what examples of pure security theater have you noticed? Even more interesting, what examples of security-as-excuse have you seen?"

Frist Posty?

[by Anonymous Coward]

Airports... Need I say more?

Nom nom nom

[Applekid (993327)]

The guard looked at her gun, said nothing and passed them in, then stopped the man behind them because he had beer and snacks in his bag. Park rules prohibit outside food. It's clear what the 'security' check was really about: improving park food vending revenues.

Heh heh, the fools. The gun's cartridge was loaded with small pretzels and Tootsie Rolls.

Re:Nom nom nom

[geekoid (135745)]

"Jokes are funny."
Ironically, jokes don't have to be funny to be a joke, it just helps.

You on the other hand need to buy a life, and you might want to pick up a side of sense of humor with the change.

"it is not funny because they are using technical terms in an incorrect way that detracts from their intention."

There are many comics that do that with their humor, you might even want to say that it's the unexpected use of definition that makes it fucking funny, dumbass.

I'm sorry, that was harsh~

Re:Nom nom nom

[by Anonymous Coward]

This isn't digg or reddit - behave yourself.
Some guidelines:
1. Never describe anything as "epic", especially if followed by the word win or loss.
2. Use decent grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
3. Conceal all enthusiasm under a smug nerdiness.

Re:Nom nom nom

[by Anonymous Coward]

I was called a humorless dick for making the very same comments about 40 minutes ago.

Yet you're still going on about it.....

You might find this picture instructive [kairosnews.org].

The Iraq theater

[Harmonious Botch (921977)]

No trolling intended, but the war in Iraq now is the biggest piece of security theater on the planet. It does not make the US safer ( indeed it probably does the reverse ) but it does give certain people benefits. Chaney and friends make millions on no-bid contracts, and neocons get to implement policies that in more normal conditions would not be tolerated by the public.

Re:The Iraq theater

[by Anonymous Coward]

See, the thing is that there weren't insurgents in Iraq before the US got there.

Re:The Iraq theater

[dolphino (166844)]

Yeah, but see, you don't know that (the only ones who have proposed that are the experts over at CNN).

During my time spent in the middle east (all of which took place before 9/11) I saw... drumroll please... people who wanted to kill Americans. WHAT? DURING CLINTON?? Yes. We are not the 'cause' of these insurgents, and no matter how much you hate Bush for whatever you think it is he has done, or how much you want to blame him for the problems he inherited (from, IMO, the dem president that preceded him), he didn't make them either.

The very boring and undramatic truth of the matter is, there are always people who will capitalize on the loss or misgivings of a group of people, and people of the Middle East happen to be the latest target. Arafat did it with the PLO (which has NOTHING to do with liberating Palestinians, and has everything with creating a power base), and the same thing is happening now around Iraq.

So about "the sure thing is, there weren't insurgents": this rhetoric may work on your bleeding heart girlfriend, and probably works on many here on Slashdot, but don't try flinging that nonsense around vets, govt employees, or anyone else who has actually tried to DO something about these issues. It may sell books or commercial time on news channels, but it doesn't make any sense.

Just my 2c

Re:The Iraq theater

[QuantumRiff (120817)]

Had a friend that grew up in Ireland. He once mentioned, not long after the war started against Iraq, that in the 80's, a couple Brittish soldiers were at a security checkpoint in northern Ireland They shot up a car, that had a family in it. He mentioned that that one incident, in that one town, caused a huge number of people to join the IRA, and fight against Brittan. It took a good 10 years for things to calm back down.

Here were people that hated a country, and wanted it to die and suffer, but they just said that all the time. One wrong action, and those people actually started taking up arms, bombings, etc. There is a big difference between wanting American's killed, and actually trying to kill Americans. He wondered how many people we moved from Haters to Terrorists in Iraq.

Think about it for a minute. You may hate a person you don't like, and wish that they were dead. How much would it take to push you to the point that you actually murder them?

Re:The Iraq theater

[HadouKen24 (989446)]

Person who does not like the US != insurgent.

There were, in fact, people in the Middle East who really dislike America. Heck, 9/11 wouldn't have happened if that weren't the case.

However, you have to understand that this is at least in part due to American action. Our most egregious action was probably propping up the Shah in Iran. America has a history of using both deceit and pure muscle to get its way in the Middle East, and that has created a lot of enemies. Enemies that were there prior to Iraq.

Our invasion in Iraq certainly didn't help things. It flared up old angers that had, in some areas, begun to die out. It brought our men within striking range. It shouldn't be any kind of surprise that this situation creates insurgents. Our invasion of Iraq strengthens the political position of our enemies; their claims about America seem to be confirmed, and it helps stokes the fears that cause people to flock to such causes.

You have to look at this historically. People in the ME don't hate the US because of our freedom. They hate the US because of how we've treated them in the past.

(It is, of course, more complicated than that, but this is a Slashdot comment.)

Re:The Iraq theater

[Darkness404 (1287218)]

There are no universally accepted definitions of insurgency. The common concept, in a wide range of definitions, is that it involves a desire for political power, achieved through means illegal under the rules of the existing government. It has long been used in the professional military and political literature.

So, using that accepted common concept, there are only insurgents if they are rebelling VS the government. So of course when the government is corrupt those that are corrupt aren't the insurgents. Hussein was a bad man, Hitler was a bad man, the funny thing is though, the same people who lament that our government didn't do anything about Hitler until it involved the US (who killed his own people and invaded other countries) are the same people who think that we shouldn't go after Hussein (who killed his own people and invaded other countries).

Re:The Iraq theater

[MrMr (219533)]

I feel safer killing insurgents in their backyard
Insurging against you in their own backyard?

You're not strange, your colonialism is of all ages.

Re:The Iraq theater

[thsths (31372)]

> I feel safer killing insurgents in their backyard rather than killing them here, but I am probably strange that way.

And yet you are here? Why aren't you killing insurgents in their backyard? Maybe because it does not feel all that safe after all...

FAA pilot on the do not fly list.

[mcrbids (148650)]

For the longest time, I was on the "do not fly" list. I never knew why, but my name is very common. Turns out somebody used an alias the same as my name in the Bahamas to commit international wire fraud - I found this out when it took 6 hours to open a $100 bank account. It wasn't identity theft - just coincidence.

So here I am, not only taking my shoes off, but also being escorted to the back room for the "enhanced" security check every time I fly on an airliner. The only problem is that I'm an FAA-licensed pilot, and have all the clearance to enter just about any area of the airport! (once I get past the extended searchdown, that is)

What a joke...

Re:The Iraq theater

[postbigbang (761081)]

I'll make an exception to my long standing policy of not responding to ACs:

The reason that America hasn't been subsequently attacked had nothing to do with punishing the silly, stupid Taleban in Afghanistan, or fomenting a war in Iraq. The perps were a group calling themselves Al Qaeda, and they haven't been touched. They were weak, tiny, and extremely clever; they got past security in NE airports, then were successful in three crashes, while the fourth dive bombed in Pennsylvania. This was not a million man army with nukes, just some very clever people. They subsequently disrupted transportation in Spain, where people were murdered, and also in the UK, where others were murdered.

No subsequent acts have occurred for any number of reasons, almost none of which have to do with the wars, as the wars were about pride and oil. This has nothing to do with US Dept of Homeland Security, which is an oxymoron.

Fight the bastards when they try to impinge on your privacy and your liberty. Question authority. Do so politely. Then let the judges kick them in the tender parts. That's their job. Do it again, repeat until you're free, because today, you're not.

On the web side of things

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167)]

While creating an intranet for the company I was doing some outside work for I ran into a problem authenticating through their antiquated AD system. Rather than updating everything or heaven forbid give management an actual password to remember my instructions were to "make it as scary as possible but don't actually put a password on it." I had a four tiered authentication system which would allow you to move forward regardless of what was put in the text boxes. They loved it, and a little piece of me died when I cashed the check.

Re:On the web side of things

[Chapter80 (926879)]

Slightly off topic, but your story reminds me of software I was involved with.

We created a delete function, and kept getting reports that the customer accidentally deleted records. (And we had no undelete function.) So we added a "Are you sure?" dialog.

The incidents of accidental deletion did not go down.

So we added text "This cannot be undone. Continue?" and still the incidents did not go down (People just randomly click OK.)

Finally we changed it to "Please key in 'irreversible' to continue with the deletion." This solved the problem.

Re:On the web side of things

[by Anonymous Coward]

Why the hell would you have a button that actually says "OK" on it? That's poor design, because you should know that people always click OK. A better design would be to have buttons that say "Delete" and "Cancel", with the Cancel button selected by default. Typing the phrase was a good alternate solution to eventually arrive at, though.

Exteneded Validation Certificates

[hal9000(jr) (316943)]

If public CA's are supposed to be trusted authorities of identity on the Internet, why do we have to have "extended validation" of an entity before they get a certificate? If we can't trust the CA to validate entities before issuing certificates in the first place, how can we trust them to issue Extended Validation Certificates in the second?

Oh, I forgot, they are in collusion with Microsoft and other CA's to inflate the cost of digital certificates they already issue.

Apartment Accepting Packages

[sgtron (35704)]

In 2001 I was living in an apartment complex in a North Dallas suburb. If you got a package that wouldn't fit in those teeny-tiny mailboxes then the mail man would drop off the package at the apartment complex office and you could pick it up in normal office hours.

After September 11th, the apartment management sent out a memo to all residents that because of the heightened state of terrorism awareness the office would no longer allow packages to be held there for the residents.

Of course my first thought was they were just tired of dealing with the packages and saw this as a convenient excuse to stop holding packages for people.

Disneyland

[Eco-Mono (978899)]

My adviser back at University, Rich Maddox, used to tell a story from his youth, when he was dating a girl who (apparently for religious reasons? I don't remember exactly) always carried a large knife in her purse. So anyway, they were going to Disneyland with a couple of friends, and as they went through the entry turnstile they stopped Rich and asked to check his backpack for weapons and so forth. And they found a pocket knife there, and told him he couldn't bring it into the park because it was dangerous. That's when Rich called over to his girlfriend who was already inside, and said "Honey, do you still have that knife with you?" And she pulled it out of her purse and said "Yeah, why do you ask?"

Re:Disneyland

[eldavojohn (898314)]

P.S. When Rich tells the story he always implies that it was because the guys running the turnstile were too busy looking at his girlfriend's boobs to look in her purse. Take that however you want.

Her boobs were shaped like knives?

Oh Sure

[eldavojohn (898314)]

Every time I'm held up by the "No Fly List" because I have an insanely common name, I feel like a victim of security theater. How many would be terrorists have been caught by the no fly list?

In my opinion almost all forms of random searches are security theater.

People putting loaded handguns in their homes in the case of a wood-be assailant or robber breaking in. This is not only security theater, it increases the risk you are putting yourself and your family in. Not to mention that in most instances of murder the victim knew the assailant. You're more likely to die of suicide than a robber killing you.

I don't know if these are examples where the security theater is a cover for another reason--unlikely. But there's clearly examples where it just makes your life worse more often than better.

Re:Oh Sure

[ChaosDiscord (4913)]

And since they're a group of them, desperate enough to mangle or kill you, they certainly all have weapons. And given the situation, the weapons in question are certainly assault rifles. And they're not stupid, just desperate, so they'll rely on strength in numbers, attacking by the hundreds. At this point, having arranged a group of hundreds of heavily armed men, they pretty much have to murder you. This is why I feel much safer keeping a loaded M1 Abrams in my bedroom.

MIT ITS passwords, and Microsoft File Servers

[FranTaylor (164577)]

I cannot verify this story, anyone else?

Back in ArpaNet days, MIT had machines running an OS called ITS. It was a friendly and happy world and there were user accounts but no passwords. But networking means that strangers can connect and so Arpa insisted that passwords be added. So the ITS developers added a password prompt that ignored the password, and this made the Arpa people happy for a while until they figured it out and made them actually check the password.

In a similar vein, Microsoft file server passwords were originally checked only on the client, a fact which went undiscovered until Samba came along.

Re:MIT ITS passwords, and Microsoft File Servers

[TheRealMindChild (743925)]

In a similar vein, Microsoft file server passwords were originally checked only on the client, a fact which went undiscovered until Samba came along.

It wasn't just Microsoft. NFS at one point in my life was synonymous with "no fucking security". It trusted the UserID that you transmitted with it. UserID 0 was a handy value to use...

Wireless Security

[Toreo asesino (951231)]

I had a boss that named the wireless network "Virus". On asking him about this, he explained "it's to scare off hackers - they won't connect if they think they'll get a virus". Ah, ok.

It's probably worth pointing out he wasn't aware you could "secure" a wireless point with a basic WPA key at least - it was completely open, anyone could walk right in, assuming they beat the fear of the "virus" that was.

Re:Wireless Security

[by Anonymous Coward]

I had a boss that named the wireless network "Virus". On asking him about this, he explained "it's to scare off hackers - they won't connect if they think they'll get a virus". Ah, ok.

I named two network printers I didn't want people using "Broken" and "Dot_Matrix" (before there were access lists)

Shortly after 9/11

[hudsonhawk (148194)]

...while I was temping for a company in Chicago, I was asked to deliver a box of candy to a client in the Sears Tower. While entering, I went though the giant, heightened security setup - x-rays and all - and got held up because I had a box cutter in my backback.

They held it up triumphantly and shouted at me, "Just what do you expect to do with this?!"

I wanted to ask them them the same question back. Just what did they expect I'd do with that? In a building that had security guards with guns? Was I going to hijack the building and crash it into a plane?

Re:Shortly after 9/11

[maxume (22995)]

You also had a box. You should have pointed at it.

Re:Shortly after 9/11

[OglinTatas (710589)]

Glad to see you back from Gitmo, man. We missed you.

Back button on bank's web site

[rduke15 (721841)]

On my bank's web site, when I used the browser's back button, things started to get out of sync. You had to click their own custom back button somewhere in the pages so that everything would continues to work.

When I called to report it, I was explained that I had to click their own back button, not mine. When I said "Yes, I know, I just wanted to let you know so that you can fix the bug sometime", the final answer was something like "It's by design. It's for security reasons". At that point I was expected to say "ok. thank you" or whatever, and to understand that a "bug" was totally unthinkable on their super-reliable ultra-secure blah blah bank site.

Nevertheless, a few months later, the bug was gone. I didn't call back to say I'm now worried about the security...

Nice Article

[dunezone (899268)]

The article fails to talk about security as a deterrent.

The RFID bracelets on an infant can give comfort to the parents but its more of a deterrent then anything. Sure the hospital can tell the parents that their child is protected. But the hospital is not protecting the child as much as its protecting itself. For example:

A guard that is in the bank is not there to stop a bank from being robbed. He deters people from committing the crime itself. In a robbery situation the guard himself is useless because the individual or individuals robbing a bank would take him out first. But in most bank robberies, the criminals are going to go after a bank without a guard anyway.

A mall guard doesn't stop people from stealing, he creates the presence of being watched, therefor deterring people from stealing.

Same goes with cameras in stores. Most of the time no one is monitoring the cameras and if anything their used to watch employees over customers. But their deterring employees from doing anything unethical or illegal and they deter people from stealing.

In my opinion the idea of security theater and feeling safe is crap. You might as well spend the time and effort to know your safe then make it seem like you feel like your safe.

The entire war on drugs

[Hatta (162192)]

What's left to say? It's pretty clear that drugs are more dangerous when they're only available in the unregulated black market than in a regulated legal market. Criminalizing the use of drugs only hurts drug users more, yet it's done in the name of safety.

What's worst is that we've been fighting this war for decades, no end is in sight, we've spent more money and lost more freedoms fighting it than we have in Iraq. And still, no one in power has the balls to speak out against this.

We live in a sick, sad world. People who would meet the non-violent act of drug use with the violent acts of arrest and imprisonment are themselves violent criminals. Yet in this society they are deemed good citizens.

WOD == price support

[mkcmkc (197982)]

The purpose of the War on Drugs is to support the price of illegal drugs. If these drugs were legalized, the price would instantly collapse, and lot of powerful people would be very upset. (credit to Doonesbury or Outland (?) for pointing this out)

It also helps politicians pander to ignorant members of the right.

My fave

[Deadstick (535032)]

...is the one we've all seen in the airport: confiscation of bottled water. Every time a TSA guy finds your bottle of Dasani, he pours the suspected explosive in the trash. His very first good catch will be his last...

rj

Re:My fave

[arthurpaliden (939626)]

The put all the possible liquid expolosives together in the same trash bin beside the security station in the middle of the crowed airport....

Re:My fave

[77Punker (673758)]

I imagine the security checkpoint creates enough of a bottleneck that a bomb detonated right in the middle of it would kill as many people as a bomb on board an airplane.

Passwords

[qoncept (599709)]

The DOD replaced reasonable passwords with Common Access Cards. The difference? Instead of having to find out someone's 8+ character alphanumeric password that changes every month, you need to have physical access to their card and need to know their 6 digit number that never changes. Meanwhile, everyone is forgetting their card in the reader when they go to lunch, so they can't get back on base -- but feel free to use it yourself in the meantime.

Password Policy

[Aram Fingal (576822)]

I was working with a particular system where the vendor added a strict password security policy. They require a mixture of uppercase and lowercase letters as well as at least one digit or special character. Later on, I discovered, by accident, that the password is not case sensitive when you actually go to login. It turns out that the routine for setting the password enforces stronger passwords than the underlying system can actually support. The vendor, of course, claimed that they would be upgrading their underlying password encryption algorithm very soon.

2002 Winter Olympics

[ryanisflyboy (202507)]

I was living in Salt Lake City during these games. Remember that the Olympics were only a few months after 9/11. There were huge security concerns. We saw low flying helicopters over the city we were told were searching for nuclear material. We saw various 'special forces' teams deployed in the mountains around venues looking for 'snipers.' The security downtown was surreal. People were checking every car coming in and out for bombs. Everyone had to go through metal detectors (in some cases, you actually had to pass two layers of metal detectors). The amount of government agents per city block was astounding. Many were armed with sub-machine guns. For such a quiet city like Salt Lake, seeing troops walk around in full combat gear was quite theatrical.

My favorite security theatric was an ATF agent standing on a street corner, machine gun in hand and in full combat gear. He was waving and smiling at people driving buy to be sure they all saw him and his gun. I stopped and watched him for about 20 minutes before he started using his radio while giving me the 'killer' eyes. Despite the smiling and waving, he was not friendly, not at all. I decided to vacate my vantage point. Those guys were so bored they were looking for targets to harass.

My experience with the TSA and Patriot Act

[SoCalChris (573049)]

Patriot Act

I had some stock options through my job that I tried to cash through the etrade account that had been set up for me. The stock price was rather high, and our trading window was about to close, so I tried selling at literally the last minute. The sell order failed, and no reason was given. A few days later, I received a letter in the mail from etrade telling me that my account was locked. Several years before, while living in a different state, I had an etrade account. Because the SSN was the same on both accounts, but the addresses were totally different, some part of the Patriot Act made them lock my account until I could prove my identity by sending them a notarized copy of my social security card.

Another example, which isn't really security theater, just shitty work by the TSA happened to me a few years before that.

My wife had to fly out of state for a funeral, and she took our 6 month old daughter with her. I took them to the ticket counter. Since she was traveling with a baby, a car seat, and her carry on bag, the ticket agent offered to print me a pass that would allow me to accompany her to the gate and help her carry her things.

As I was getting up to the xray machines, I remembered that I had a small pocket knife in my pocket. I hadn't removed it since I wasn't expecting to go through security. As I got to the xray machine, I told the operator what had happened, and told her that I'd just go back through the line and put the knife out in our car.

She seemed ok with that, and told me that I could just go ahead and go through the xray machine, and out the exit that was just a few feet from the xray machine, so I didn't have to go back and work my way through the line.

As soon as I went through, several TSA agents came up and detained me for attempting to bring a weapon through the security checkpoint. I wound up being searched, my 6 month old daughter that I was holding was searched, and I was questioned for about an hour as to why I had tried to take a knife through security. Not once did they go talk to the lady running the xray machine less than 50 feet away, who had told me to go through.

In the end, my knife was confiscated (It was about a $50 knife), and I was threatened that I could be under arrest for attempting to smuggle a weapon through the airport, and I could be facing a several thousand dollar fine for it. They filled out a report, and made me immediately leave the terminal.

About a month later, I received a letter from the TSA saying that they had chosen not to fine me this time, but if I ever came up in their system again I would face the maximum penalties.

That was the day that I lost all faith in our government.

Guard Gates

[PPH (736903)]

In a past life, I worked for a major aerospace company. Security appeared pretty tight, what with armed guards checking IDs at entry points. They also had manned checkpoints to check vehicle passes at the road entrances. These were usually issued to upper management, enabling them to park inside the fence, close to the buildings. The peons had to park outside and walk in.

Because of my job in various R&D labs, I was always hauling equipment around in my personal vehicle. There were provisions to issue employees in my position a temporary vehicle pass and a 'parcel pass', allowing us to transport company equipment through the gates.

Throughout my career, I was never ever challenged when exiting a facility with a hatchback, obviously loaded with expensive equipment. The vehicle pass system existed only to ensure that some scumbag grunt didn't park in a manager's space. Security guards were nothing more than glorified parking enforcement.

At some of the production facilities, gate guards were instructed to examine lunch boxes of the workers exiting to ensure that they were not swiping tools. Briefcases were exempt from such checks, as they were typically carried by trusted engineers and management. As most of the engineers working within production facilities were indistinguishable from mechanics by dress or any badge markings, I suppose it never occurred to security that a worker intent on swiping tools could obtain a briefcase.

Joint account

[by Anonymous Coward]

I was trying to transfer some funds out of a joint bank account. I used the phone based system (and answered the usual security questions). Then the person told me that for the transfer to be allowed, both people on the joint account needed to sign-off on the transfer.

The other person wasn't available... so I just said "Ok, hold on I'll get him." Then waited a few seconds and said "Hi. Yes, I'm he. Yes I confirm the transfer."

They transferred the money. No authentication, no double-checks. Just some voice on a phone (I didn't even bother faking a different-sounding voice) saying that it was ok.

Beyond security theater

[by Anonymous Coward]

I have a friend who works for *organization*. They work in a
single-story building, in a suburb of a second-tier city. The building
sits on its own plot of land, on a hill, in an industrial-office-park
kind of area. The building is a lab, but it's mostly monitoring
equipment. It's not weapons, or explosives, or significant quantities
of chemicals.

This is probably not what anyone would consider a high-value target.
There's never been any kind of attack or threat against the building
or its personnel. But after 9-11, management started obsessing about
security.

The first thing they did was get armed guards for the building. Armed
guards did not make my friend feel secure. My friend wondered about
their training and worried about getting shot.

Guard duty is tough. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter,
and the guards aren't in good condition to begin with, since they just
stand there all day and never get any exercise. In practice, the
guards spend most of their time sitting in their cars in front of the
building, with the engine running for heat or AC.

Management decided that this didn't look good, so they built a guard
shack along the right-hand side of the driveway. Now the guard sits in
the shack and watches the cars go by.

But that didn't seem very secure either--a bad guy could just drive
right by without stopping
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing).

So they added a gate, and spikes, and a card reader. To pass, an
employee stops at the gate, rolls down their window and swipes their
card. The gate goes up, the spikes retract, and they drive through.

My friend doesn't trust this system a bit, and makes a point of
watching to see that the spikes have retracted before driving over
them. There was speculation among the staff as to who would be the
first to blow out their tires on the spikes. As it happenes, it was
the mailman, followed some time later by two visitors who either
didn't see or didn't understand the signs warning against following
another vehicle through the gate.

I suggested that they stencil silhouettes of all the vehicles they've
caught on the guard shack, the way fighter pilots (used to?) record
kills on the nose of their airplanes.

My friend points out that even with a gate and spikes, the system only
protects against attackers who
- care about their tires, and
- don't have trucks
because any vehicle can blow through the gate and make it the short
distance to the building on four flat tires, and any truck can drive
over the curb and avoid the whole thing.

Management decided that blowing out their visitors' tires was
unfriendly, so they instituted a new procedure for passing the gate.
Now, drivers stop at the gate and roll down their window. The guard
walks from the shack (on the right), in front of the car, to the card
reader (on the left), takes the driver's card, swipes it, and returns
it to the driver. Then the driver can pass.

The staff considered that the guards were now at risk of being run
over--and it happened. An employee reached down in his car to get his
card, his foot came off the brake, and the car rolled forward into the
guard. The guard was taken to hospital--I don't think the injuries
were too serious. The driver has to appear in court and pay fines--I
don't know if it is criminal or civil.

This is beyond security theater. This is real damage.

Crossing back into US from Canada...

[KC7GR (473279)]

Every year, my lady and I go up to Canada for the 4th of July weekend to escape the annual (and mostly illegal, under local city codes) fireworks war-zone that infests our neighborhood. We've been doing this for several years, and in fact we both just got our NEXUS cards. [cbsa-asfc.gc.ca]

To help put this in context: I'm a ham radio operator, as well as a volunteer first-responder. I've had formal training, through our city's fire department, in disaster relief, emergency medical procedures, basic search-and-rescue, the whole bit.

Because of the above, our minivan is well-equipped for emergencies. I've installed multiple communication radios, a navigation computer, and I carry a medical trauma kit and various safety gear such as flares and a reflective vest. Besides the small antenna farm on the roof, I also have a light bar mounted on the back end (amber, red, clear... same as many tow trucks).

Every bit of it is legal under the road laws of every state except New York (I know, because I spent a couple of long nights going through said laws to make bloody sure!). Couple all that with the fact that I work for our state's police agency (non-commissioned, civil service).

Now, with all the above in mind -- Last year, we're coming back through on Sunday afternoon. I normally have the radios and navigation system on while driving, and this has never, in times past, been an issue.

Not this year. The border guard we drew seemed to be short on both sleep and temper, and rudely ordered me to turn EVERYthing off before he would even talk to us. One of the questions he asked, after that point, was who I worked for. When I told him, he said (snappily) that, for that reason alone, I should understand why he'd told me to turn everything off.

He let us move on at that point, but before I took off I told him, flat out, "No, I don't understand."

And it was the honest truth! If someone's going to try and set off something that goes bang via radio, or other wireless means, it strikes me that they're going to go to considerable effort to keep such activities hidden. They certainly would not do so in a hugely-long border-crossing line, where there was absolutely no way to move anywhere but through the guard posts, in a minivan that stands out like a solar flare and has ham radio callsign plates to boot!

I have no clear idea why this guard was so nasty, or what bizarre purpose his attitude served. I will say that it did indeed strike me as pure theater.

The only thing I can think of is that, perhaps, his sergeant or lieutenant was observing him at the time, and we didn't notice...?

Keep the peace(es).

Fake Camera

[daveywest (937112)]

My wife manages an apartment complex. She was having problems with messes left in the laundry room. We installed a fake camera with a flashing led light.

The office had a second door with a peep hole into the laundry. To give the camera an air of legitimacy, she sat in the office one night and made a note of everyone who came into the laundry. When they came in to pay their rent the next week, she mentioned that she saw them doing their laundry on the "tape" and asked about a fictitious mess that was left.

She managed to do this to a couple of the complex gossips, and never had a problem in there again.

NJ Army National Guard

[charlie763 (529636)]

I was an intelligence analyst in the NJ Army National Guard until my contract ended in 2006.

We were deployed twice to protect Port Authority facilities around NY and NJ. On both deployment we had our weapons M16A2s or pistols. On our second deployment we were not given ammunition. Yes, we were walking around in uniforms holding empty rifles.

The best we could do is radio the Port Authority Police or possible club someone trying to steal our weapons. Our combat effectiveness was slightly above that of Nerf.

Airport Security & Mystery Liquids

[Uhlek (71945)]

Not having flown a commercial airliner recently, I'd completely forgotten about the liquid/aerosol rule and decided to carry my luggage onboard. After standing in line for awhile, I noticed the signs and remembered. Crap! I had my mouthwash, an aerosol can of deodorant, and my aerosol shaving cream with me. Given the length the line had grown to, I decided to just forgo those items than risk being late.

A bit about those three items. Both the shaving cream and deodorant were in aerosol cans, both larger than the size allowed, but obviously retail items. The mouthwash was too large as well, and was a generic amber bottle, about 14 or so ounces, with a prescription sticker (I have gingivitis).

I pull all three items out, and just tell the TSA guy that I know I need to toss them. He glances at all three and tells me I have to ditch the deodorant and the shaving cream, but I can keep the mouthwash.

Because it's prescription.

So, the two retail aerosol cans that are nearly impossible to inject anything into are verboten, but the amber bottle with the mystery liquid in it, that's okay, because it has a sticker with a Walgreens logo on it. Fan-fucking-tastic.

Re:I've been a part of the theatre.

[Anarke_Incarnate (733529)]

OK, solution. Ask for TWO cans of soda. Drink the first one and then tear the second one in half. Try to pour as much of the flowing liquid into the now empty first can.......no wait.. Ask for THREE cans......crap....