Man Arrested At Airport for Unusual Watch

http://depletedcranium.com/man-arrested-at-airport-for-unusual-watch/

by mkr-hn • 14 years ago

165 107 14 years ago

Very good article. I think that, historically, security overreaction tends to increase as the stakes increase. From what I've read there was a lot of domestic overreaction during WW1 and WW2.

The fact that weapons are so much more effective and disguisable these days leads me to believe that, sadly, this sort of thing is only going to get worse. I can't imagine what the reactions will be when people are as concerned about biological weapons as they are about explosives.

agwa• 14 years ago

> From what I've read there was a lot of domestic overreaction during WW1 and WW2.

Yes, there was. The unfortunate difference between then and now is that then there was a clear end to the hostilities. The "war on terror" has no such clear end. Doesn't matter that Bin Laden was killed, doesn't matter that there hasn't been a successful terror attack in more than 10 years (and that nearly all the unsuccessful ones probably wouldn't have existed if not for the assistance of undercover FBI agents). When will it end? You can always claim that there are still more "radicals" out there who want to kill us, and that further fear is justified.

mikeash4• 14 years ago

Another difference is that the government generally tried to keep things orderly and calm. Not to say that government didn't engage in overreaction as well (e.g. internment camps) but the overall theme appeared to be one of reassurance.

Modern government seems to thrive on making people as afraid as possible, perpetuating the cycle instead of damping it.

rsynnott• 14 years ago

Which to an extent, is why it exists; a last-minute substitute for the previous unending pseudo-war.

IanDrake• 14 years ago

It's sad that this isn't terribly surprising at this point.

HN friends, please, please, make sure you opt out of the body scanners. If for nothing else, I can assure you the dude that's feeling your junk is far more embarrassed than you are and if he has to do it often enough, maybe he'll quit.

Last time I flew, I got a new guy. It was his first time and one of the veteran BT's had to coach him through it. He seemed mortified and I think that might have been his last day on the job.

JimmyL• 14 years ago

Maybe it's just the airport I was flying out of (LGA), but I noticed that the TSA signs explaining the millimeter-wave scanners no longer say that you can opt-out of them. Where it used to say (IIRC) in smaller print at the bottom that you could opt-out and get a manual pat down in a private space if you so chose, there was now boilerplate text about how there were no health and safety risks associate with getting scanned by the machine, and that it wouldn't produce a photo-realistic image of me.

Once I opted-out by walking to the metal detector and (after being told to go into the other line for the L3 ProVision unit) asking for a pat-down, the agents handled it as usual (a bunch of awkward shouts for a "male assist at station 3", an embarrassed guy walking over and asking if I knew how this process worked and had done it before, and then a pretty perfunctory pat-down) - but if I didn't a priori know that I had that right, it wasn't listed on any of the many signs in the security scanning area.

kenneth_reitz• 14 years ago

They normally have that posted somewhere, but it varies greatly from airport to airport.

guelo• 14 years ago

I thought it was the backscatter ones that people objected to. The millimeter-wave ones are much less intrusive and there's no concern about health risks.

wissler• 14 years ago

"if he has to do it often enough, maybe he'll quit."

How is making someone with some decency quit a valuable objective, when he will only be replaced with someone with no decency?

dalke• 14 years ago

Or replaced by someone else with decency, and then another, and then another, and then ... The training costs add up, for one, potentially leading to change.

Let's supposed eventually that position is filled by "someone with no decency." Then passengers getting screened become more and more annoyed and outraged, complaints rise, and potentially leading to change.

Now, that change might be to no longer have opt-out. But in either case, the possible course of events is likely not as simple as what you outlined.

marssaxman• 14 years ago

Every time they have to hire a new screener, they have to spend money on training. If the job of screener is well-known to be unpleasant, they'll have to start paying the screeners a higher salary to compensate them. If passengers routinely opt for the time-consuming manual patdown instead of submitting to the pornoscanner, they'll have to hire more screeners to cope with the demand. Each of these things make the screening process more expensive. If we make it expensive enough perhaps they'll stop doing it. There doesn't seem to be any other way to get rid of it.

Evbn2• 14 years ago

Also, you get a firm rub on the back which feels nice after carrying luggage.

new299• 14 years ago

I know this wasn't in the UK, but in the UK if you're selected, you can't opt out. Which is pretty insane.

SoftwareMaven4• 14 years ago

Everybody is selected in the US.

methodover• 14 years ago

I took a plane trip a couple days ago, and I had a new guy too.

Unfortunately he was coached to move his hand along my inner leg until he 'felt resistance' which to him meant banging his hand, hard, against my testicles. It hurt.

I'm not sure if I'll continue to opt out. If it's a choice between being seen without clothing and possibly being punched in the nuts, I think I'll choose the former.

antidaily• 14 years ago

Odd that he wasnt able to explain his way out of it. That's what makes it such a nightmare. Getting pulled aside and questioned is one thing, actually getting arrested seems like Idiocracy is coming true.

jusben1369• 14 years ago

Whether we like it or not terrorists have shown a deep attraction to use airplanes as instruments of terror. And therefore we're going to have higher levels of security on air travel than we like. And that that security is likely to be managed by people who are newly recruited and poorly to middling in terms of compensation. I'm not sure if this outcome was fair but what is apparent is that he triggered multiple events. Watch, boots, shirt etc. It legitimately has the feeling of a "dry run" - enough at least to warrant being scrutinized. Not sure why he ends up in jail though.

mikeash4• 14 years ago

Why is that "therefore" in there? Even if we let terrorists blow up one airliner every year, air travel would still be the safest mode of transport available. In addition, the security we have now is atrocious in terms of its effectiveness, so we could have security that's makes us safer while being substantially less obtrusive.

I don't understand why people ever defend the TSA at all. They not only make the experience of air travel fairly horrible, but they don't even keep us safe! I could understand defending them if you were afraid and they kept the bad guys away, but they don't even do that.

Daniel_Newby• 14 years ago

> Whether we like it or not terrorists have shown a deep attraction to use airplanes as instruments of terror.

American society is currently going through a raving paranoia phase. This is not about terrorists, it is about the public getting off on wallowing in fear. Hence the TSA, Department of Homeland Security, Amber Alerts, escalating the War on Drugs, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, zero tolerance everything, transparent backpacks and metal detectors for schoolchildren, hysterical panics about the supposed dangers of immunizations of all things, and so forth.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

Bin Laden's genius was to realize this and trick us into defeating ourselves in detail. Fortunately for us he chose something relatively harmless like the 9-11 attacks. Imagine if he had arranged for Al Qaeda to be caught sneaking iodide and omega-3 fats into every major baby food factory. We'd now be defiantly raising a generation of retards to show those ragheads who's boss.

SoftwareMaven4• 14 years ago

We'd now be defiantly raising a generation of retards to show those ragheads who's boss.

We seem to have that covered without their help.

Evbn2• 14 years ago

And Mr Packard has a domain name whose letters can be used to create a key ingredient of a dirty bomb.

DanielBMarkham• 14 years ago

Some civil liberties group should start specializing in exotic travel apparel, including odd watches, intriguing earrings, suspicious-looking belt-buckles, and so on.

This insanity has to stop. Has anybody seen the progaganda the agency puts out? The idea that TSA is now using little stacks of toe-nail clippers and such as proof of how great a job they are doing should be ringing alarm bells somewhere.

astrodust4• 14 years ago

I'm pretty sure by now more people have died of ingrown toenails than any potential terrorism that prevented by the TSA.

diego3• 14 years ago

I'm no fan of the TSA, but how can you be "pretty sure" when terrorism acts are extremely infrequent events with unpredictable results?

It's perfectly possible that the way the TSA works (e.g. knowing that you'll go through body scanners or thorough patdowns) has deterred potentially nasty attacks. Luckily we'll never know.

Everyone who criticizes the TSA (and with reason) should also think about what they would do if they were given the task of trying to prevent Black Swan events with minimal disruption to the 99.9999 percent of normal travelers.

It's an extremely hard problem. Most people who talk about it simply don't have enough knowledge of statistics, or the psychology of deterrence.

ecdavis• 14 years ago

It doesn't even have to be an exotic watch to arouse suspicion, something like a Casio F91W will do just fine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Guantanamo_Bay_detainee...

Andrenid• 14 years ago

I'd never seen this. That's just... wow.

neurotech12• 14 years ago

BTW Sgt. JD Nelson of the Alameda County Bomb Squad is not some rookie. He is the explosives guy on Mythbusters.

There quite possibly could have been a reason why Sgt Nelson thought this went beyond a piece of art.

KeliNorth• 14 years ago

No, what it means is that Sgt. Nelson knows how to work with bombs. It doesn't make him a subject matter expert on terrorism or art. Just bombs. And as charged, yes, the subject of the article did have materials needed to make bombs minus the explosives.

Everyone who has a timer/watch/cellphone does, which is the point of why this is so ridiculous. If you arrest everyone who has all the materials necessary to make a bomb minus the explosives, everyone would be arrested.

mikeryan• 14 years ago

There's more to making a detonator then just the timing device.

UnoriginalGuy3• 14 years ago

This is what I brought up in the last thread. IEDs are IEDs because they can be made from almost anything.

Now it does take skills which most people don't have; but this isn't about skills it is about physical kit, and purely in terms of the physical stuff needed I'm almost certain you could buy it all at the airport in the "secure" part (e.g. travel clock).

dlgeek• 14 years ago

The original article I read yesterday (from /.) said the bomb squad cleared him but he was arrested anyway.

shrikant• 14 years ago

I'm all for civil liberties, but the info in this case is actually quite thin. I'd keep the pitchforks and torches away till a fuller picture emerges.

The facts of the case so far are:

1) Dude is outfitted in camo, watch that looks like an IED timer, and shoes rigged out like the "shoe bomber".

2) Dude gets pulled aside and claims it's all art.

3) Dude gets arrested.

Getting flagged for questioning because of (1) seems straightforward to me.

How it went from (2) to (3) is less clear, and it might be prudent to hold off the hand-wringing for now.

ScottBurson2• 14 years ago

Disagree. The fact that McGann actually has a Web site demonstrating his artistic bona fides is plenty of evidence for me.

jQueryIsAwesome3• 14 years ago

Who is going to tell you how it went from 2 or 3? The TSA? That would be certainly unbiased.

The fact is that he was arrested for having a wierd outfit. If somebody believes that this guy who has been an artist for many years, flies a lot and registered his domain in 1995 is a actually a terrorist they are delusional and shouldn't be in charge of any kind of law enforcement.

saalweachter• 14 years ago

You've got to look at four probabilities: X, probability someone wears a geeky watch with exposed toggles and electronics; Y, probability someone wears military-style clothing; Z, probability someone wears oversized shoes; W, probability someone is a terrorist.

I'm betting X * Y * Z is still much larger than W.

incision• 14 years ago

>He is the explosives guy on Mythbusters.

I don't know what's worse...

The idea that knowing how to blow stuff up qualifies you to profile folks as potential terrorists or that being consulted for a TV show qualifies you for anything.

astrodust4• 14 years ago

If you work in the explosives business, maybe everything looks like a bomb to you.

driverdan• 14 years ago

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

readme2• 14 years ago

Honestly I don't think they were in the wrong for stopping the guy. Arrest was probably too much, but when you are wearing a watch that looks like a bomb detonator, you should definitely be stopped and questioned.

Unfortunately every member of the TSA cannot be an expert in this man's artwork to understand what he actually had in his posession. Suspicious watches (and protruding wires!) are one of the things they are trained to look for as all of the 9/11 hijackers had digital casio wrist watches. So yeah, honestly I think confiscating the watch and stopping him was a good move. Maybe even denying him his flight would be sane.

What does it take for you guys to agree that someone shouldn't get on a plane, a backpack full of c4!? The idea is to stop the disaster before it happens, and at this point all we have are vague clues. Not to mention the fact that for economic reasons, each TSA officer is going to be a layman who probably isn't well versed in electronics.

Combine this with the fact that it looked like he "hid" it under his coat... This guy needs to use some discretion when flying, I'm sorry!

As much as I disagree with the erosion of our civil liberties, wearing a watch that looks like a bomb detonator onto a plane is not a smart move. Sure, us HNers would know the difference between art and a real device. The general public does not, and we cannot expect them all to gain our same level of competence with electronics.

Finally, the TSA stopped someone that was actually suspicious.

ncallaway• 14 years ago

I don't think many people complained that this guy received extra scrutiny. If something looks/seems suspicious it's acceptable to apply a higher level of scrutiny in determining the actual risk. The article acknowledges this, and says it's pretty reasonable that they stopped him, talked to him, and would have been reasonable if they had asked him to mail the device to himself.

What's totally unreasonable in any context is the fact that this guy was CHARGED WITH A CRIME, and is now sitting in jail on $150,000 bail. He will have to go through a lengthy trial process and potentially serve jail-time. Unless the facts are contrary to what the article presents (which is possible), this is totally unreasonable.

mikeash4• 14 years ago

> What does it take for you guys to agree that someone shouldn't get on a plane, a backpack full of c4!?

Are you seriously satirizing the idea that the line should be drawn at items that are actually dangerous?

Roybatty• 14 years ago

"Comrade, your attire doesn't conform. Don't worry, we have a government authorized uniform in this back room for you. Please follow me"

DanBC• 14 years ago

Is there a photograph of the watch anywhere? (Not that it makes much difference.)

gav• 14 years ago

Does anyone consider that showing up at the airport with a watch that looks like a bomb is a good idea? We all know that in the current climate that the TSA is prone to overreact.

It's not right that this is the case, but like it or not, it is.

VexXtreme• 14 years ago

And this is why we can't have nice things... What is it with TSA and their lack of will to cooperate and listen to people? They just act like a bunch of mindless enforcers these days and have zero regard for common sense.

jakejake• 14 years ago

This reminds me a little of the MIT student who was almost shot when she went to the airport wearing some kind of LED circuit board on her shirt http://boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html

UnoriginalGuy3• 14 years ago

If anyone is interested they dropped the "fake bomb" charge since they couldn't prove intent and she took a deal with "disorderly conduct" because it was hard to defend against (since it just requires other people to be upset by your actions with or without intent). She got 50 hours community service and had to apologise for her "crime."

Based on this interview: http://boingboing.net/2008/09/22/star-simpson-one-yea.html

She was in and out of court for a year, nobody was punished, and nothing was altered. This could and maybe will happen again.

nivertech2• 14 years ago

Man in military uniform takes a bomb mockup to airport ...

Idiot

UnoriginalGuy3• 14 years ago

Guy on HN doesn't read the article and jumps to wild unfounded conclusions, then makes a glib remark.

Idiot.

nivertech2• 14 years ago

Anybody had problems with arduinos and its various shields in airports?

shasta• 14 years ago

He also had in his possession the largest component of a suitcase bomb.

wnoise• 14 years ago

A suitcase?

ScottBurson2• 14 years ago

One possibility people seem to be overlooking is that this outcome -- getting arrested and having the case discussed in the press -- is exactly what the artist wanted.

One of the greatest purposes of art is to hold up a mirror to society, and McGann has done that very well here.

If that was his intent, I applaud it, and will be happy to chip in to his defense fund if one of his friends will start a collection.

omegant• 14 years ago

I just commented on this(I didn´t see your comment before), I think you are right and he probably forced the whole matter.

JoeCortopassi• 14 years ago

Absolutely agree with what probably happened. Everything I've read about this mentions wires and fuses. As bad as the TSA is, it seems entirely more probable that an artist wanted to make a point, by using items that draw attention, without actually being illegal. If this is just some guy with an eccentric watch, I hope they backtrack and let him go. But if it's someone trying to incite a reaction, then you can't really complain about being arrested.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes

mkr-hn2• 14 years ago

I used the title I did to avoid confusion, assuming someone already submitted a news story on the subject. I wanted to make it clear this was about the story, but not a blogspammy retelling of it.

I don't mind the edit, but I don't know that it was needed.

oellegaard• 14 years ago

I really thought about going to the US many times. Stuff like this makes me stay home in Europe or travel to other continents.

unemployed• 14 years ago

20.000 dollar! Does anyone here know if there is something like a kickstarter for people that make the news? I always feel so bad for these guys.

neurotech12• 14 years ago

Maybe something like Chipin.com - no experience with them.

Paypal might not be "dependable" and Kickstarter doesn't really do "funding for a cause" from what I've seen.

I applied to Kickstarter for a project to create a PayPal alternative, soon after Kickstarter launched. They rejected it.

hcarvalhoalves• 14 years ago

Well, the guy is an artist. If he wanted to be unusual, he's doing it right.

felicopter• 14 years ago

I find it amusing that "but he's an artist" is being said as though it might possibly influence the powers that be. The TSA, police, judges, etc. have little tolerance for anything that doesn't conform to the ordinary and expected - including art. In earlier times in the USA anyone who questioned the political-economic system was accused of being Communist; excuses didn't work then either. With authoritarianism and polarization now on the rise in the USA, things are even worse. "Different"="bad".

digits265• 14 years ago

You all cry foul when tsa does their job. Out in the civilian world you would never understand why this man was stopped but in the military world i would yave done the exact same thing. You only cry foul when nothing happens but when thousands of people die you point the finger and say why didnt we look at this. This guy had hallowed shoes a watch witch could use as a time bomb and clothes to apply medical treatment if he got shot. Why didnt the tsa stop this guy and arrest him than do a back ground check. The tsa did a good job and found someone oddly suspicious. Get out of your security blanket and realise peiole want you dead and they will disguise themselves in any way possible to kill you. They will also do dry runs to see if tsa is doing their job before they bring in real explosives. Liberties have to be sacrificed at times in order to prevent your children and loved ones from dying it is impossible to protect with pure one hundred percent freedom of movement with zero checks and balances. This guy would red flag every single checkpoint in a military zone and guess what they know military checks this so instead they are making their way into the civilian world coming for your family, friends and loved ones. Eceryone will stop crying foul when their loved ones die

darkarmani2• 14 years ago

> Out in the civilian world you would never understand why this man was stopped but in the military world i would yave done the exact same thing.

The airlines exist in the civilian world, so there are civilian expectations.

> They will also do dry runs to see if tsa is doing their job before they bring in real explosives.

What is their job? Security theater?

> Liberties have to be sacrificed at times

You assume we will get our liberties back at some point. If the TSA expires, I would agree with you, but it looks like they've taken our liberties from here forward.

gambiting• 14 years ago

In case people haven't noticed - the USA has long ago stopped being a free and democratic country. They can put you in prison for any reason, without trial,for any amount of time. This is a country,where journalists writing about some events(latest trial of an alleged "terrorist" - a guy who spent 10 years in Guantanamo without trial and now is fighting to regain freedom) is banned,under the threat of being accused of endangering national security, an accusation that could earn a journalist several years in prison.

How is this different from countries like Russia, which can send anyone to prison for anything?

namank• 14 years ago

Going to side with TSA on this.

Art is art within a specified context. Outside of which, it's usually something else. In this case, a security threat.

Jarshwah• 14 years ago

Absolutely. His intent was to provoke "in the name of art" and it cost him. Idiots like this just help to validate the roles these TSA take up. A slap on the wrist and a 'go away now' wouldn't stop other idiots from attempting the same thing.

At least they caught the guy - imagine how he'd try to paint the TSA as useless if he was allowed on through.

You poke the bear, you get the horns.

warmwaffles• 14 years ago

But why is there a need to poke the "bear" anyways? You obviously see that the TSA is something to be feared, why should it be feared by those who mean no harm? Food for thought.

sjm• 14 years ago

What of free speech? And the roles you think this validates of the TSA? As fashion police?

billybobobbrain• 14 years ago

1) If he wanted to provoke in the name of art, then it didn't cost him, he managed to achieve his objectives.

2) Being able to smuggle a watch through security at an airport wouldn't be grounds for much celebration.

3) What kind of bears have horns?

4) We don't know the full details (the official story could be wildly exaggerated), but if the TSA over-reacted then it doesn't really matter what the intentions of the artist were. If the artist was just a dude with a strange watch or if he was trying to show us the limits of our freedoms, our freedoms are still limited.

datalus• 14 years ago

Maybe they should hire people who actually know what a bomb is? Instead you have employees that probably can't even solve an algebraic equation despite getting a high school diploma. This isn't meant as a blanket statement about all TSA personnel, but a little expertise in the area wouldn't hurt.

gfodor• 14 years ago

It sure is convenient when terrorists gently place the trigger for their bombs in the x-ray bin.

petegrif• 14 years ago

Security theater gone mad.

jsilence• 14 years ago

If the terrorists goal was to take away your freedom, they apparently have won.

dewiz• 14 years ago

I personally ALWAYS put my jacket on top of my items when at the airport. As I go through security, I take off my belt, remove my wallet, cell phone and other devices from my pockets and put them in the trey to go through the x-ray machine. Then I put my jacket on top of them. Is it because I’m a terrorist? No. I just don’t want my wallet and cell phone being out in the open as they emerge from the x-ray machine. Like most people, I’m always a little nervous that if I get stuck at the metal detector, someone could grab my wallet and slip away with it. Hence, I don’t want it to be so plainly obvious.

sopooneo• 14 years ago

I hypothesize that the point of all these obtrusive measures in the name of security is not really to prevent terrorism. Instead it is so that when the inevitable happens, wherever and however, the masses will not riot. They will instead think back to all conspicuous things that the TSA was doing all those years and think, well, I guess they were trying their hardest to stop it.

Man Arrested At Airport for Unusual Watch

Related Stories