You have to buy your supplies from the duty free? That’s fine for your international terrorist, but if you’re not coming from abroad you can’t use that route. Won’t someone think of the poor domestic terrorists!?
Shit, just last week a guy got onto a plane with a loaded fucking gun and they totally missed it, but like hell you’re getting onto any plane with a European-manufactured mini bottle of shaving cream!
Last time I flew internationally, flights outside the US were fine allowing duty free booze on board, but they had copious warnings that if their final destination was in the USA, they needed to get their duty free stuff into their checked bags. They would not be allowed in the cabin of a US bound flight.
From the cited article:
*Authorities tell ABC News the incident is not uncommon, but how often it occurs is a closely guarded government secret. Experts say every year since the September 11 attacks, federal agencies have conducted random, covert tests of airport security.
A person briefed on the latest tests tells ABC News the failure rate approaches 70 percent at some major airports. Two weeks ago, TSA’s new director said every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports.
…
KTRK’s Aviation Security Expert Jim Conway says screeners have a demanding job and are susceptible to fatigue, staring for hours at monitors while looking for prohibited items.
“Look, this is simply human error,” Conway said. "When something like this happens, it’s human error. I mean, these folks are doing the best job they can.*
Which reinforces two points I’ve been making for years: one is that in looking for items (and specifically items used in previous attacks), they’ve failing to be proactive in looking for patterns and behaviors that indicate future threats. And two, by inundating poorly-trained agents with random searches of innocuous baggage and travelers they are creating a bunch of false positives that desensitize them from recognizing actual threats. Their processes are also too people dependent, and yet the training of qualified, effective agents is not a high priority for the agency.
Stranger
I think that TSA is making baby steps in the right direction with the Behavior Detection Officer program. I think the threat of lawsuits (and there have been several already) is making the agency wary of using this program to its full potential. Incidentally, BDOs are responsible for one of the few actual catches of explosive materials in an airport.
And while liquids, gels, creams, and pastes are contraband, my enormous* tupperware container of homemade yogurt and its associated stay-cool gel packs went through security with no problems. Because, apparently, yogurt is food, and therefore not a liquid or gel.
*seriously, I think it was nearly two pounds
No, they just fucked up. Both your yogurt and your gel packs should have been confiscated, unless your yogurt is incredibly thick.
Nava, can you explain about the lighters? By “hand luggage,” do you mean carry-on?
Well, yeah, they fucked up. But when my coworker behind me in line (business trip) started whining about “why should myyyyy shampoo get confiscated when mischievous can go through with* her* yogurt and it’s not faaaaair”, the excuse the TSA agents came up with was that yogurt is food.
Which was very decent of them, actually, rather than calling me back and taking away my yummy yogurt like they were supposed to in the first place.
You CAN check a bag with any size of whatever toiletry you need when you get there. What I question is the need to bring every goddamned thing on board the plane with you. I know they charge now for checked bags, but the way to get people on and off the fucking plane is to charge extra for ridiculous-sized carry-ons. Sorry, I’ve gone into my own rant here.
I flew to Birmingham (UK) from Stockholm via Amsterdam a couple of days a go. At the gate in Amsterdam one guy totally lost his shit because he was forced to dispose of a bottle of whisky. I spoke to him whilst waiting for baggage at Birmingham - apparently he had been travelling for 28 hours to get home from China. He had bought the whisky in duty-free in China as a present for his Dad, but it was only when he got to Amsterdam (between flights three and four of his trip) that someone took exception to it. Apparently something to do with Amsterdam having scanners at each gate, so the departure lounge isn’t a secure area, unlike the situation with any other sane airport on the planet.
Amen. Why the hell does mischievous’s coworker need to bring her shampoo on the plane with her?
Charge $50 for carry-ons, instead of checked bags
From the link:
Well, thank fuck. 'cause they’ll catch stuff like guns for sure that way.
… oh wait, it was in the carry on.
:rolleyes:
While I approve of the charging for carry-ons instead of checked bags you just need to look at the British Airways thread to see the second reason why people travel with huge carry-ons. It would seriously suck to be stuck in a stopover city for a day or two with what I usually carry on (wallet, bottle of diet coke, Ipad, Iphone and maybe a bag of nuts if I’m feeling crazy)
Oh, she doesn’t. While she is sweet and endearing in many ways, she is one of those people who conveniently loses her grasp of English* whenever confronted with a rule she doesn’t want to have applied to her. Which isn’t related to the thread at all, but annoying nonetheless.
*native Cantonese speaker
And when they GUARANTEE that my luggage (and contents) will arrive when I do then you’d have a point. Until then, I’ll carry everything I can onto the plane with me. Really? You don’t understand why people carry all that junk onto the plane with them?
My recollection of the evolution of the 3-1-1 rule is: it was originally 3 oz, but after a while 3.4 oz contact lens solution was allowed (since it was a common size already on the shelves), and eventually 3.4 oz got blurred into 3.4 oz of any liquid, not just contact juice.
That’s obnoxious. I would’ve socked her in the genitals for ratting you out. I bet she pronounced it “mischievIous,” too.
Last I checked, they ban lighters from flights, but you can bring one book of matches. All this was started thanks to Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. Two guesses for what he tried to use to light his shoes with.
Reminds me of the time (I’m almost 61, I’m allowed to say that, okay? ;)) right after 9.11 when I was stuck in Rothenburg and couldn’t get home for ten days. I had two bottles of Sekt in my luggage and they were NOT going to let me take it, even though it was in my checked luggage.
So hell, I went to the men’s, popped those suckers and drank 'em down.
Lord, I wish I had not done thaaaaaaat!
Q
Yes, carry-on, sorry, and what do you want explained about the lighters? If it’s the detail of what kind of incendiary I mean, I do believe that would go against board rules. The lighter is needed to threaten with lighting up the incendiary.
Stranger, I’ve got a degree in ChemE - that automatically labels me as “dangerous (may be armed even if it doesn’t look so)”.
Lighters are no longer banned on flights, with the exception of torch lighters.