You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Airport Screeners Find Blade in Man's Shoe
2004-12-23
A 33-year-old Virginia man was in federal custody after airport screeners found a box-cutter blade glued into the sole of his shoe. Authorities said Randall Rustick of Fairfax, Va., was en route to Kauai with his wife and four children at about 10:45 a.m. at Honolulu Airport's Interisland Terminal Tuesday and had placed his black dress shoes in a plastic bin for screening. A screener spotted a small metal object in the left shoe and alerted a supervisor and law enforcement to take a closer look.
"What the f...., hey guys!"
"When they saw the image on the screen, they recognized that there was some sort of object concealed in his shoe," said Sidney Hayakawa, Transportation Security Administration chief in Honolulu. Rustick was then taken to the side of the passenger line and the shoe was broken open to reveal a blade about 4 inches long in the inner sole, Hayakawa said. Hayakawa said Wednesday that he could not divulge the reason Rustick gave for having the blade. "It's under investigation right now. So, we can't reveal what he said," Hayakawa said.
Bet it was something stupid
Rustick was taken into custody without resistance and was being held at the Federal Detention Center near the airport. He was to make an initial appearance in U.S. District Court Wednesday afternoon, court officials said.
Go directly to jail, do not get to lay on the beach, enjoy your Christmas in jail
Hayakawa said Rustick's wife said the family was on vacation and headed to visit family on Kauai."That's what we've been told but I don't know how true that is or how accurate," he said.
I'll wager she is pissed....
Honolulu Airport screeners have found blades before but this case is different because the blade was concealed, which Hayakawa said he thought "shows an intent." "We've detected box-cutters, razors, knives and stuff but not concealed like this. So this is a first time for us in terms of real concealment," Hayakawa said. But Nico Melendez, a Los Angeles-based spokesman for the TSA, said that deliberately concealed weapons aren't uncommon. Over the Thanksgiving holiday a 16-year-old boy in Phoenix was found to have hidden a knife in the sole of his shoe, he said. "How often does it happen? Frequently," Melendez said. Such cases demonstrate to the flying public why the TSA has regulations, such as the sometimes criticized policy requiring passengers to remove their shoes, Melendez said. "There are people out there that want to introduce prohibited and deadly items into the fuselage of an aircraft. And we are charged with finding them and we're doing that," Melendez said.
Please make an example of this guy.
Posted by:Steve

#9  I favor universal underwear for the deaf
Posted by: Shipman   2004-12-23 4:05:29 PM  

#8  but the 45's, they were the best.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-12-23 3:02:33 PM  

#7  many 16s do this, not many 33's do
Posted by: Floting Granter5118   2004-12-23 2:57:06 PM  

#6  Danged straight CL. They also know every dirty trick a defensive linemans every dreamed of... and can hide it. :<
Posted by: Shipman   2004-12-23 2:35:52 PM  

#5  There is no flight I'd feel safer on than one that has a significant number of Polynesians flying to see family. If Samoans are present--especially entire families, better yet. Sure, you give up a little elbow room (and then some) but you've got more security than an entire squad of air marshalls.
Posted by: Classical_Liberal   2004-12-23 12:26:04 PM  

#4  Had Randy successfully gotten the box cutter past screening and tried something on the flight, his personal health would have been in serious danger. Getting all worked up about stuff like this isn't worth the effort.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2004-12-23 10:32:06 AM  

#3  Hell, i bet for some people it would mean they couldnt fly to visit their mother-in-law.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-12-23 9:57:10 AM  

#2  Anon - back when i was in the consulting biz, that would have made it virtually impossible for me to fly to a major presentation to a client! Stress?!?!?! Paranoia?!?!?!
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-12-23 9:56:18 AM  

#1  A couple of minor points: probably a quarter of the entire population have some degree of clinical paranoia. Second, that paranoia is generally under control until they are put under pressure *specific* to their personal security. A mildly paranoid person may be perfectly normal until stopped and searched by the police, but even after being let go with a "sorry about that, have a nice day", they will be unbalanced, maybe dangerously for a week or two. Had they not been searched, they would not have had a problem. And the anticipation of having their personal security invaded, gets them a week or two of getting their paranoia "warmed up". So what is the solution? Stress detection. The technology exists to determine if people are under so much stress that they shouldn't be permitted on the aircraft, for whatever reason. It doesn't matter if they are terrorists or mentally ill, they just shouldn't be allowed to fly. If they are neither, it doesn't matter if they carry a machete on board with them. And that's the rub--if they are so paranoid that they worry about having their stress detected, then they shouldn't fly. Searching their person, much more invasive, should only be used as a last resort.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2004-12-23 9:45:44 AM  

00:00