[bullseye]

> I read this as "A two inch gun was taken because the TSA agent followed procedure over common sense and logic".

This defense fell apart the moment the TSA agent said "If I held it up to your neck, you wouldn’t know if it was real or not." In other words, she graduated from blindly following protocol to being an idiot.

[owenmarshall]

Maybe not - as others note in this thread there are real guns that could match the description of this one. Whether or not those guns are lethal enough to warrant being removed from a flight is a very valid question.

Before we cast aspersions on the TSA agent, let's look at it from her perspective. The TSA has rules that say replica guns are not allowed on flights. The TSA is not likely an agency that smiles upon its front line employees exercising discretion. Her options are:

1) to confiscate the "offending" item, as supported by her training and the TSA policies, or

2) to decide the item is not a threat and let it pass security.

If she takes the first option, she risks a bit of media hullabaloo being directed at the TSA. If she takes the second she risks being wrong (what if it is a gun and someone is shot, what if someone on the airplane sees it and panics because they think it is a gun,...) and being held accountable.

And even if she lets it go through what's to say a supervisor who is evaluating the front line agents doesn't take note of a deviation from training/policy and fire her then?

The TSA agent was acting, in my mind, completely rationally given the framework under which she has to act. If we want to blame anyone here we need to look straight to the system.

[simoncion]

> The TSA has rules that say replica guns are not allowed on flights.

Could you link to those rules? TIA.

[DanBC]

But that's just normal human speaking dynamics.

"Why are you making me do this stupid thing?"

(I cannot agree that this thing is stupid, because that makes my job, and thus me stupid, so I'll grasp at straws to defend this action) "It's not a stupid thing! Here's a justification!"

[JshWright]

What she meant (I think it's safe to assume) was something along the lines of...

  While it's obvious to you and I standing here examining it that
  it's a prop gun, if it were being wielded in a threatening
  manner, it would be far less obvious, and it's reasonable to
  assume that it could be perceived as a real threat.

Given the fact that there are several models of gun that small that are quite capable of killing you, that seems like a pretty reasonable argument to me.

[bullseye]

I think you give the agent too much credit, but perhaps that was the thought process. I'll concede that point.

However, I still think it was a dumb argument. Note that the closest small gun you linked with any chance at being lethal was 4-5 inches long. A gun half that size, which someone would have to basically hold with their thumb and forefinger, cannot possibly be menacing in any circumstance unless you are a Smurf.