comment
stringlengths 1
8.79k
| context
sequencelengths 0
817
|
|---|---|
>
Is it not legal to own a warship anymore? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?"
] |
>
Always chill down here in TX | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?"
] |
>
It’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX"
] |
>
Taking it gopher shooting. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas"
] |
>
"It's for target shooting." | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting."
] |
>
Forgot he had it in his suitcase, probably | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\""
] |
>
I would like to know where he's going | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably"
] |
>
He’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going"
] |
>
Yea with no firing pin | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display."
] |
>
I don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.
How do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin"
] |
>
They took my toothpaste too. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target."
] |
>
It's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too."
] |
>
Maybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool."
] |
>
Seems a bit of overkill for deer hunting | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out."
] |
>
since it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting"
] |
>
84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?
Edit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?"
] |
>
*Recoiless rifle | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?"
] |
>
Does it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle"
] |
>
Does it launch stuff?
Yes
Is that stuff a rocket?
No. That stuff is a shell. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?"
] |
>
Why does anyone need this other than for terrorism? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell."
] |
>
Same lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm. | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?"
] |
>
Which responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this? | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm."
] |
>
Just casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon
r/asonedoes | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?"
] |
> | [
"Always glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes",
">\n\nAlways glad when rocket launchers get picked up by security.",
">\n\nAKCHTUALLY it's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nmany carl gustaf rounds are rockets",
">\n\nThe weapon is still a recoiless rifle.",
">\n\nand it still launches rockets",
">\n\nYou can shoot rockets out of a gun. \nYou can't shoot gun rounds out of a rocket launcher.",
">\n\ni don't think that's necessarily true. pretty much all rocket launchers besides the m1 bazooka and the panzerfaust1 the rocket is ejected explosively before the rocket motor activates so that the user doesn't get a face full of exhaust. if you can fling rockets out like that you ought to be able to fling non rocket projectiles.",
">\n\n\npretty much all rocket launchers \n\nLike the Javelin guided missile, and... uh.... hmm....",
">\n\nRPG 7, Panzerfaust3, M72 LAW, AT4...",
">\n\nI mean if this wasn’t packed with ammo this would be totally legal provided it was properly declared. \nIt’s just basically a metal tube without ammo.",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “demilitarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nCan’t be having that in the headline though.",
">\n\nNote the \"problem\" TSA had wasn't that it was a massive weapon, but rather that it was 'undeclared' at check in.",
">\n\nMan lot of airport gun stories today, but yea the issue isn't that they had a firearm in checked luggage it is that they didn't declare it. Though I believe this would be considered a destructive device. Not in the article but I'm assuming it was either an FFL holder or this was a deactivated and the owner thought he didn't have to declare it",
">\n\nYup. My brother is a sheriff's deputy in CA and he just had to chat with tsa at both airports and that was that. I don't even think the ammo had to go in a separate checked bag or anything if im remembering correctly.",
">\n\nI didn't think you could send ammo at all.",
">\n\nYou can. They have to be in a container designed to hold the ammo and not in the gun, as well as the requirement to be in a locked container. They can be in the same container as the gun, just not in the gun.",
">\n\nYup sounds about right based on our experience. Gun case was locked and weapon was unloaded.",
">\n\n84 mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle for really big deer.",
">\n\n'Round about these parts the deer have taken to wearing bullet-proof vests.",
">\n\nThey'll likely want some reactive plates for the shaped charge I'm assuming is in there.",
">\n\nIt’s going to be tough to convince anyone that you accidentally packed that into your suitcase",
">\n\nIt has been de-militarized it really isn't a weapon at this point.\nIt is little more than a cos-play prop at this point.",
">\n\nAka, not news",
">\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight.\"",
">\n\n\n\"She packed my bags last night pre-flight\n\nAnd I think it's gonna be a long, long time\n'Til touchdown brings me 'round again to find\nI'm not the man they think I am at home\nOh, no, no, no\nI'm a rocket man\nRocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone",
">\n\nIt’s my emotional support Carl Gustoff*",
">\n\nJUST as the founding fathers intended.",
">\n\nYeah you just take this to the postal kiosk, they give you a box and you mail it home.",
">\n\nwas anyone else like \"i really need to see what an 84mm caliber weapon looks like\"?",
">\n\nIs it ACTUALLY a functional Carl or is it just a repro/prop? You can't buy real ones at Wal-Mart...",
">\n\nPer another article, the weapon was made “de-militarized” for display purposes.\n\nThe passenger was able to provide paperwork verifying the rifle’s de-militarized status. An on-duty TSA explosives specialist also corroborated that it was no longer in use.",
">\n\nThis not a rifle.",
">\n\nIt's a recoilless rifle.",
">\n\nThis was properly de-miled. so I don't see what the issue is. Legally speaking it's just a lump of metal.",
">\n\nwell the facts don't get the masses all riled up now do they!",
">\n\nIt's not black, it has no bump stock, and it's not semi auto. What's the issue",
">\n\nThe pistol brace.",
">\n\nIsn't shaped much like a pistol, so check, no pistol brace. Don't see a burner either, so no issue with gas stoves",
">\n\nEveryone knows rockets require proper vent-a-hoods",
">\n\nDo you have to declare a weapon that is no longer a weapon? It seems like it would be a good idea to avoid the inevitable shit show, but I don't see how this guy broke the law.",
">\n\nI couldn’t even take a gun to Cayo Perico",
">\n\nI like how in the US we discuss tremendous weapons like it's a nail clipper or something.",
">\n\nIt's mm or caliber not both. Caliber is inches MM is obviously metric.",
">\n\nPretty sure you are allowed one anti-tank carry-on so long as its 85mm or less",
">\n\n~~Looks like at AT4. The model AT4, prounced \"eighty four\".~~\n~~Again, because scary looking AT4s show up on reddit all the time:~~\n~~These are a single use weapon. An AT4 once fired can't be reloaded. This is no different than a piece of spent brass, except brass can be reloaded and this cannot.~~\n~~It is not a live weapon. It cannot be made into a live weapon. Its often decoration or a keepsake from former military, and there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of these things floating around, used in the GWOT from 2001-2020.~~\n~~The person probably didn't check it because they figured it was just a spent tube, but I guess TSA has different regulations.~~\nedit: Its not an AT4.",
">\n\nIt’s a Carl Gustaf. Also Swedish, but reloadable instead of single-use like the AT4. It’s been demilled, though, so it poses just as much of a threat as a spent AT4 does.",
">\n\nSoo, someone had an AT4 tube? Was this brandon herrea lol?",
">\n\nCarl gustoff recoilless rifle.*",
">\n\nAT4 (Eighty Four) is what I always default when I see 84mm, bad force of habit.",
">\n\nDon’t let it happen again. (Runs finger across throat)",
">\n\nYou laugh now, but he'll be laughing when some creep tries to mug him with a tank.",
">\n\nMillimeter and caliber are completely different things.\nShitty title.",
">\n\nLink asks for a login. \nIt’s poor practice to mix the terms. 84 caliber would be 0.84 of an inch in diameter. E.g. for the venerable M2 you would either say 0.50 caliber or 12.7mm, but never 12.7mm caliber.",
">\n\nYes. Doesn’t change what I said. There’s book definitions, then there’s real-world use and best practices. The very article you linked shows this if you read through it: “caliber of __” with no mixing of terms as the headline does.\nThe journalism is shit anyway. How many people know how big an 84mm projectile is, or what it does? The writer should have just said “anti-tank weapon” and it would have been clearer and more effective.",
">\n\nI like how the problem isn't that the guy tried to fly with a rocket launcher, but that he didn't declare it before checking it.",
">\n\nBecause it is perfectly legal to fly with firearms, as long as they are in locked containers and declared at check-in.",
">\n\nWhat do you mean I can't bring my avalanche cannon?",
">\n\nFound in checked luggage… that’s not really luggage. That looks like a Pelican case. Which can be used to transport anything, but I wouldn’t say finding weapons in a Pelican case is exactly a strange place to find them. \nOf this shot was buried under a bunch of underwear and t-shirts in a duffel bag… then this headline would be more appropriate.\nThe undeclared part is what’s worthy of mention.",
">\n\n“I need it to protect my house”",
">\n\nSan Antonio will soon be infamous with their \" I forgot\" passengers.",
">\n\n“Oh this? it’s a garbage disposal.”",
">\n\nWhat makes this one so special compared to the other 6000 found yearly?",
">\n\nwell for starters... it's a fuckin rocket launcher... they don't find 6,000 of them in TSA baggage a year",
">\n\nWho doesnt travel with a heavy mortar in case they have to assault entrenched positions of...uhm...deer? Yes, lets go with that.",
">\n\nSooo, practically historical, since it was first developed in what... 1946 or somewhere there abouts?\nIt's an empty tube, and there wasn't any actual ammunition with it?\nNow, I'm not a huge gun nut, but beyond getting hit over the head with it, I don't see how it will do a whole lot of damage...\nJust declare that shit and put it into your checked luggage, but if you're going to be an idiot about it, people will make fun of you... deservedly... and you might just end up in the media as being a moron... again deservedly...",
">\n\nI think they did put it in the checked luggage. They just didn't declare it. Not that it matters given how some airports just cut the locks off firearms cases.",
">\n\nYeah, but on the other hand we all know that the TSA aren't the most educated lot, so you can't really expect them to recognize everything in the way of arms either.\nSorry, but if you want to bring something like that onto a plane just do your fucking due diligence and figure out how to do it correctly.",
">\n\n\"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent!\"",
">\n\nit's useless. pretty much a novelty item at that point but yeah slow day at work I guess",
">\n\nThe fact that somebody tried this at all makes me wonder how often they succeed in shipping things like this via airlines..",
">\n\nTbf, the ONLY issue is they didn't declare it. It's perfectly legal to transport these via checked luggage.",
">\n\nAnd likely as some other people pointed out was probably a salesperson of some contractor who fucked up.",
">\n\nEh it’s probably fine",
">\n\nClearly for self defense purposes. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure anything above 50 cal is considered \"destructive\" ordinance and might be illegal to have.",
">\n\nDestructive devices are legal to own as long as you go through the registration process with the ATF.",
">\n\nNice clickbait title. The weapon was demilitarized for display purposes, had documentation with it, and was cleared by TSA.\nWhat are you playing at? Reddit please downvote this if you want to keep this trash off the platform.",
">\n\nI’m not trying to start a 2nd Amendment discussion, but why exactly would a citizen in the US need one of these?",
">\n\nThis is not a weapon sir.Its just an empty tube of metal.",
">\n\nGot it. I was going by the title that said it was a weapon.",
">\n\nDon't know about you guys, but I just don't feel safe without my bazooka.",
">\n\nThe gun owner was quoted saying: \"It's for duck hunting ...\"",
">\n\nThat's not a duck that's an airplane",
">\n\nOr an armored limousine. My guess is that this was purposefully done so that a domestic terror organization could observe law enforcement's response and plan accordingly for next time.",
">\n\nThe first actual threat they've found in their 8030th day of existence!",
">\n\nIt's demilled so they're still on that goose egg",
">\n\nThis is clearly what our forefathers meant by the right to bear arms😂",
">\n\nBro it was legal to personally own a fucking warship back then, do you really think they would have given a rats ass about a single gun?",
">\n\nIs it not legal to own a warship anymore?",
">\n\nAlways chill down here in TX",
">\n\nIt’s just their new hunting rifle…. Everything is bigger in Texas",
">\n\nTaking it gopher shooting.",
">\n\n\"It's for target shooting.\"",
">\n\nForgot he had it in his suitcase, probably",
">\n\nI would like to know where he's going",
">\n\nHe’s going to a gun trade show in Las Vegas. It was going to be in a display.",
">\n\nYea with no firing pin",
">\n\nI don't own any firearms any more and never traveled with one even when I did.\nHow do they keep baggage handlers from swiping a checked firearm? I gotta think the firearm sticker you put on the case makes them a more attractive than usual target.",
">\n\nThey took my toothpaste too.",
">\n\nIt's my god given right to be able to dislocate my shoulder and whang my neighbors above ground pool.",
">\n\nMaybe (hopefully) a domestic terrorist chickened out.",
">\n\nSeems a bit of overkill for deer hunting",
">\n\nsince it was seized, does that mean ill be able to buy it if it goes up for auction?",
">\n\n84...correct me if I am mistaken but isn't that a fucking cannon?\nEdit: Clicked link, its a rocket launcher. Wtf?",
">\n\n*Recoiless rifle",
">\n\nDoes it launch stuff? Is that stuff a rocket?",
">\n\n\nDoes it launch stuff?\n\nYes \n\nIs that stuff a rocket? \n\nNo. That stuff is a shell.",
">\n\nWhy does anyone need this other than for terrorism?",
">\n\nSame lawful reasons anybody owns any firearm.",
">\n\nWhich responsible gun owner wants to claim responsibility for this?",
">\n\nJust casually travelling with an anti-tank weapon \nr/asonedoes"
] |
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)
Israeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.
The effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.
Previous research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5 | [] |
>
TIL mice have boobs | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5"
] |
>
I mean, they are Mammals. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs"
] |
>
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me? | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals."
] |
>
I haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?"
] |
>
Modern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later"
] |
>
I for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible."
] |
>
A mice change | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace."
] |
>
I’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change"
] |
>
For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.
The potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer."
] |
>
Can you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.
I would love to read and learn more. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones."
] |
>
Metastasis == Spreading
Yours is just a more specific usage of the word | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more."
] |
>
The person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.
Is that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word"
] |
>
Metastatic cancer = cancer that has spread
Cancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already
Benign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread
Source = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4."
] |
>
Think of all the mice they will save! | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school"
] |
>
There's an XKCD comic that sums it up.
When you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin "kills cancer cells in a petri dish," keep in mind: so does a handgun. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!"
] |
>
One of my favorite comics of all time.
I could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient” | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun."
] |
>
"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer" | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”"
] |
>
murder-fuckers
Not dying a virgin, nice. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\""
] |
>
"In mice" is very different from "in a petri dish". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice."
] |
>
Napalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making."
] |
>
Every time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.
The ironic "still no cure for cancer". | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo."
] |
>
Hooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\"."
] |
>
Do you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer."
] |
>
It seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason."
] |
>
You're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases."
] |
>
Maybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies."
] |
>
They're too distracted by the Vogons. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer."
] |
>
I still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.
I do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons."
] |
>
I'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New "Trump"s and "McConnell"s are on the way! | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance."
] |
>
They've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!"
] |
>
Except that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.
It's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.
And that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit.
What actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable."
] |
>
You'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads."
] |
>
Big pharma enters chat | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads.",
">\n\nYou'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said."
] |
>
Hooray for mice! | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads.",
">\n\nYou'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said.",
">\n\nBig pharma enters chat"
] |
>
cancer prevention is already available. it involves not eating animal products and loads of junk and poisoning the environment. it’s useless and cruel to continue abusing animals for any reason, including these studies. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads.",
">\n\nYou'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said.",
">\n\nBig pharma enters chat",
">\n\nHooray for mice!"
] |
>
So the children in the cancer hospital should of just eaten less animal products according to you? Oh and enjoy your iron deficiency btw. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads.",
">\n\nYou'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said.",
">\n\nBig pharma enters chat",
">\n\nHooray for mice!",
">\n\ncancer prevention is already available. it involves not eating animal products and loads of junk and poisoning the environment. it’s useless and cruel to continue abusing animals for any reason, including these studies."
] |
> | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nIsraeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.\nThe effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.\nPrevious research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5",
">\n\nTIL mice have boobs",
">\n\nI mean, they are Mammals.",
">\n\nI have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?",
">\n\nI haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later",
">\n\nModern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible.",
">\n\nI for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace.",
">\n\nA mice change",
">\n\nI’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer.",
">\n\n\nFor instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. \n\nThe potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones.",
">\n\nCan you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.\nI would love to read and learn more.",
">\n\nMetastasis == Spreading\nYours is just a more specific usage of the word",
">\n\nThe person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.\nIs that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4.",
">\n\nMetastatic cancer = cancer that has spread \nCancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already\nBenign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread\nSource = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school",
">\n\nThink of all the mice they will save!",
">\n\nThere's an XKCD comic that sums it up.\n\nWhen you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin \"kills cancer cells in a petri dish,\" keep in mind: so does a handgun.",
">\n\nOne of my favorite comics of all time.\nI could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient”",
">\n\n\n\"scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer\"",
">\n\n\nmurder-fuckers\n\nNot dying a virgin, nice.",
">\n\n\"In mice\" is very different from \"in a petri dish\". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making.",
">\n\nNapalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo.",
">\n\nEvery time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.\nThe ironic \"still no cure for cancer\".",
">\n\nHooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer.",
">\n\nDo you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason.",
">\n\nIt seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases.",
">\n\nYou're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies.",
">\n\nMaybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer.",
">\n\nThey're too distracted by the Vogons.",
">\n\nI still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.\nI do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.",
">\n\nI'm sorry man but Trump isn't the last bad person. About 385,000 babies are born each day according to the UN. New \"Trump\"s and \"McConnell\"s are on the way!",
">\n\nThey've been saying shit like this for decades. We discovered this, we discovered that. It will never reach the public, cancer is way too profitable.",
">\n\nExcept that a patentable total cure for even a single type of cancer would be insanely profitable for a company. You could sell a course of the drug for one million dollars, when costs you a dollar to produce, and you know what? People would pay. They may scream, yell, riot even, but they would pay. There would be sob stories all over the news about kids dying, but they would pay.\nIt's completely heartless, but that's what those companies do.\nAnd that's ignoring that a huge amount of cancer research is state-sponsored, they have a stake in ensuring that it actually gets cured, and they have the ability to bypass patents in the interest of the public well-being. If there was a cure for cancer, you wouldn't have to worry about some company locking it away, instead there would be some government agency or public university getting rich off it, while the politicians who scramble to feebly take credit. \nWhat actually happens is that these drugs fall to the scientific process. Sure this initial study shows promise, but now it has to be replicated independently. And again. And then move up gradually to the next level of studies. And those have to be replicated. And so on and so on and so on. Each replication is a likely source of failure. Each step up in study level is a likely source of failure. Each increase in study size will likely result in failure. You know what doesn't generate headlines that drive headlines? Study failures. Nobody wants to read about how a hypothesized miracle pediatric cancer drug actually makes kids arms fall off and their face start to shrink. So you will read about how a miracle drug passed its first initial study in something like 5 mice in a group of 10 of them, in an article that hypes you up so you keep scrolling past their ads.",
">\n\nYou'll get negged for that reply, and I agree with you 110%, well said.",
">\n\nBig pharma enters chat",
">\n\nHooray for mice!",
">\n\ncancer prevention is already available. it involves not eating animal products and loads of junk and poisoning the environment. it’s useless and cruel to continue abusing animals for any reason, including these studies.",
">\n\nSo the children in the cancer hospital should of just eaten less animal products according to you? Oh and enjoy your iron deficiency btw."
] |
I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second... | [] |
>
Give it about 2 months. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second..."
] |
>
"What is wired?"
- my 19-year-old co-worker | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months."
] |
>
It was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker"
] |
>
No, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on "the Biden Administration" | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator."
] |
>
Not true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.
Edit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%
Edit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\""
] |
>
I wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership."
] |
>
If I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire.
The US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles.
.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles
New Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like."
] |
>
When you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network.
Edit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles"
] |
>
There's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious."
] |
>
True, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks? | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol"
] |
>
Pretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?"
] |
>
Unless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network.
Edit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system* | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside."
] |
>
Not sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*"
] |
>
I trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does."
] |
>
I only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.
I picture them using IBM punch cards. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas"
] |
>
Admiral Adama has entered the chat. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards."
] |
>
so say we all! | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat."
] |
>
It’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.
Anyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!"
] |
>
If you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting "Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking "Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security."
] |
>
It’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit."
] |
>
Sure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password."
] |
>
Yeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys."
] |
>
Maybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that."
] |
>
Also I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance."
] |
>
Don’t people just use their phone’s 5G data? | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily."
] |
>
You can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?"
] |
>
The latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks."
] |
>
Banning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though"
] |
>
You can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more"
] |
>
I would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments."
] |
>
So patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block."
] |
>
I'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies."
] |
>
The GOP wants to sell that data to China, they don't want them to get it for free. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network"
] |
>
Honestly if we just banned all social media from phones and only allow them on desktop...may fix a lot of issues around society. After taking all of them off my phone and now forgetting my phone even exists half the time, I've realized it's the thumb throw "casino slot machine" feeling that is the addictive part...just one last hit. On desktop it doesn't do shit for me, I just check it once or twice a day and walk away, nothing addictive at all about it. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network",
">\n\nThe GOP wants to sell that data to China, they don't want them to get it for free."
] |
>
I recently started wearing normal "dumb" watches. It's surprising how much less you use the phone when you aren't using it to check the time. It keeps you from doing the whole "check time > see notifications > check notifications > spend a half hour or more on social media" thing that can happen multiple times a day. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network",
">\n\nThe GOP wants to sell that data to China, they don't want them to get it for free.",
">\n\nHonestly if we just banned all social media from phones and only allow them on desktop...may fix a lot of issues around society. After taking all of them off my phone and now forgetting my phone even exists half the time, I've realized it's the thumb throw \"casino slot machine\" feeling that is the addictive part...just one last hit. On desktop it doesn't do shit for me, I just check it once or twice a day and walk away, nothing addictive at all about it."
] |
>
notifications are a mental parasite for these applications.
I am quite happy to have turned off nearly all of them. The only things that get the permission of a notification are things that actively require an immediate response. | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network",
">\n\nThe GOP wants to sell that data to China, they don't want them to get it for free.",
">\n\nHonestly if we just banned all social media from phones and only allow them on desktop...may fix a lot of issues around society. After taking all of them off my phone and now forgetting my phone even exists half the time, I've realized it's the thumb throw \"casino slot machine\" feeling that is the addictive part...just one last hit. On desktop it doesn't do shit for me, I just check it once or twice a day and walk away, nothing addictive at all about it.",
">\n\nI recently started wearing normal \"dumb\" watches. It's surprising how much less you use the phone when you aren't using it to check the time. It keeps you from doing the whole \"check time > see notifications > check notifications > spend a half hour or more on social media\" thing that can happen multiple times a day."
] |
>
Pardon my ignorance, but what is Tik Tok actually doing? How is it a threat to a network? Doesn't a phone's security stop it from accessing other nodes on the local network? | [
"I thought the whole state of Utah banned it for a second...",
">\n\nGive it about 2 months.",
">\n\n\"What is wired?\"\n- my 19-year-old co-worker",
">\n\nIt was magazine. I mean, a mini-book with pictures. A monthly blog printed on paper, if you will... A blog is a tiktok with words. No not the narrator.",
">\n\nNo, more like: Greg Abbott allows Chinese firms to buy up vast swaths of Texan farmland, oilfields and water aquifers and then blames it on \"the Biden Administration\"",
">\n\nNot true, China owns less than 1 % of foreign countries invested farmland in the US. Doubt that 1% is all in Texas.\nEdit: Corrected to 1% instead of 0.25%\nEdit 2: USDA reported that foreign individuals and entities held an interest in 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land at the end of 2020, representing 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all land in the U.S. Canadian investors own the largest share of foreign-held land in the U.S., 12.4 million acres, making up 32% of all foreign investments, followed by the Netherlands with 13%, Italy with 7% and the U.K with 6%. Chinese investors hold 352,140 acres of American land, representing slightly less than 1% of total foreign ownership.",
">\n\nI wonder what a dot of .24% of the United States would look like.",
">\n\nIf I did my math correctly; it would be roughly the size of New Hampshire. \nThe US has a total land area of 3.797 million sq miles. \n.24% of 3,797,000 is 9112.8 sq miles\nNew Hampshire is 9,349 sq miles",
">\n\nWhen you have an operating nuclear reactor and the data associated with it and research done with it on your network, I can see why you wouldn't want China using backdoors via tiktok into your network. \nEdit: The number of shadow banned responses I'm getting is truly hilarious.",
">\n\nThere's almost no way that there's data associated with the nuclear reactor going over the main camous UT network lol",
">\n\nTrue, but how much would you trust the compartmentalization of their individual networks?",
">\n\nPretty well, considering the risk, and I'm sure they already ban the majority of social media/etc from being used inside.",
">\n\nUnless they keep their research on local-only networks that have zero connection to the internet, I wouldn't trust access to any of the networks in the system. There are too many ways for interconnection from network to network. \nEdit: I wouldn't trust allowing a known Chinese government spying software access to any network in the system*",
">\n\nNot sure what UT does, but that's exactly what the Navy does.",
">\n\nI trust the Navy slightly more than I trust any state run entity in Texas",
">\n\nI only trust the Navy to have never hooked them up to the internet at all.\nI picture them using IBM punch cards.",
">\n\nAdmiral Adama has entered the chat.",
">\n\nso say we all!",
">\n\nIt’s wild how many people don’t care about their data and privacy. I’ve told my sister in law numerous times about this and she, a 20 something year old, doesn’t care or understand.\nAnyways, I have no problem with government / corporate issued devices or networks not allowing KNOWN unsafe and insecure apps, websites, etc. the general public really needs a serious lesson in cyber security.",
">\n\nIf you're in an important secure job or having things like financial information get out, yeah but a person posting \"Hey guys, having a birthday party at Chuck E Cheese for my six year old kid Devin\" is not going to seriously harm the majority of people, what do you think malicious actors in the Chinese government or Facebook could realistically do with that? Nobody in China is looking at a trending TikTok dance by a stay at home soccer mom married to a vending machine executive and thinking \"Yes, this will help us plan our attack on American infrastructure if war were to break out\", they'd be looking for people with actual real connections to important shit.",
">\n\nIt’s always surprising how dumb smart people can be. The guy having a birthday party for his kid ends up being the top security guy who uses his kids birthday as a password.",
">\n\nSure but the large majority of the population are not top security guys.",
">\n\nYeah, but the more widespread the app is, the more likely you are to pick up something like that.",
">\n\nMaybe but that's only an argument for top security personnel to need to be more careful, the suburban soccer mom still doesn't really need to worry about their TikTok dance.",
">\n\nAlso I I’d almost rather a foreign country has this info than a U.S. country who can use this data against you more easily.",
">\n\nDon’t people just use their phone’s 5G data?",
">\n\nYou can. This is just for UT devices or devices on UT networks.",
">\n\nThe latter includes most students using campus wifi in their dorms though",
">\n\nBanning something has never in the history of the world made people want it more",
">\n\nYou can tell the age & whether or not they use tiktok by some of these comments.",
">\n\nI would love to block it on my home router but they made their links super long and super sparse to make it hard to block.",
">\n\nSo patriots are fine the the NSA spying on them, and the entire planet. But worried China might see their selfies.",
">\n\nI'm pretty sure it's more about making sure foreign governments don't have spyware on their network",
">\n\nThe GOP wants to sell that data to China, they don't want them to get it for free.",
">\n\nHonestly if we just banned all social media from phones and only allow them on desktop...may fix a lot of issues around society. After taking all of them off my phone and now forgetting my phone even exists half the time, I've realized it's the thumb throw \"casino slot machine\" feeling that is the addictive part...just one last hit. On desktop it doesn't do shit for me, I just check it once or twice a day and walk away, nothing addictive at all about it.",
">\n\nI recently started wearing normal \"dumb\" watches. It's surprising how much less you use the phone when you aren't using it to check the time. It keeps you from doing the whole \"check time > see notifications > check notifications > spend a half hour or more on social media\" thing that can happen multiple times a day.",
">\n\nnotifications are a mental parasite for these applications.\nI am quite happy to have turned off nearly all of them. The only things that get the permission of a notification are things that actively require an immediate response."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.