• Got_Bent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    I just took a charter flight that didn’t involve going through TSA or the airport terminal.

    Whatever happened on the flight itself was irrelevant as the sheer pleasure of getting on a plane without the standard anal probe far outweighed all other aspects of the journey.

  • AlolanYoda@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    A lot of people around me tend to parrot that a lot of the safety measures are not for explosives detection, but for drug trafficking prevention. I’ve always disagreed because nobody ever presented any evidence to it, and the measures in place do come from explosive detection (unless they have metal drugs now idk). But I’ve wondered whether there is some truth to it.

    • Dicska@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I’ve watched a video about this recently. The problem is, most detectors were based on X-rays in the past decades. Liquid explosives are pretty close to the density (and/or other properties) of water, and you can’t tell for sure whether there’s toothpaste or boom juice in that tube.

      However, some airports started using expensive MRI MRI like X-ray* machines that can see stuff in more detail, plus, it lets you to make cross sections from different angles and therefore have a 3D model that you can rotate on your screen (it’s rather cool).

      EDIT: I just realised someone else linked this, too. I would leave it here, it’s still educational.

  • pingveno@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    If you want to skip having a big ass bag full of liquids, many products are available in solid form. Toothpaste comes in tablets, shampoo comes in bars, and shave lotion also is available in bars. Then you can save your liquid quota for what really matters, like a wide assortment of personal lubricants.