Each Thanksgiving travel season, there are stories that range from slightly odd to truly bizarre. This year was no exception.
On November 25th, a female called the Miami-Dade Police with information about a bomb aboard an American Airlines flight from Miami to Honduras. The police also received an e-mail saying there was a bomb on the same flight.
All bomb threats are taken seriously, and the police department and TSA conducted searches of the plane. The flight was delayed by about four hours. No bomb was found on the plane, and after it was cleared by law enforcement authorities, the flight left for Honduras.
Most of us know that e-mails can be traced, but apparently not everyone does. Law enforcement authorities traced the bomb threat e-mail back to a woman who told them that she made the claims because she was late for work and was concerned that her tardiness would cause her boss to be late for his flight. Apparently, she made the threats to buy him some time. Here’s a link to the local media coverage.
As strange as this sounds, it’s not the first time something like this has happened. I’ve seen other reports of people calling in bomb threats when they’re running late for their flights to keep the plane on the ground until they get there. We’ve also had more than a few people say “what if there’s a bomb in my bag?” when they get to the gate too late to board their flight and want to get their checked bag back. Besides being incredibly selfish, it’s illegal, and when caught, these folks are arrested and face hefty fines.
Lynn
TSA Blog Team
76 comments:
That's nice.
Why does TSA assume any liquid below 3.4 ounces is safe but that any liquid over 3.4 ounces is dangerous explosive?
Why does TSA toss these dangerous explosives into open containers in the middle of airports?
Why does TSA dispose of these dangerous explosives as if they were exactly what is indicated by their labels?
Why does TSA treat a bottle of Pepsi like soda when it's time to dispose of it, but as a dangerous explosive when it transits the checkpoint?
How does TSA screen the liquids sold past its checkpoints?
Does TSA test a random sampling if confiscated liquids to determine how many liquid explosives people are attempting to bring through checkpoints?
Why can't TSA point to a single piece of independent, peer-reviewed research to support its liquid policies?
Why does TSA continue to post inaccurate signage about the liquids policies in airports?
With this post Britney's Big Gulp has traveled off the page. Good try. We still want to see the video. Anything else, and we will remain convinced Big Gulp was not X-rayed.
Where's the Britney video, Bob? Where's the policy on ice, Bob?
I hope she's tried, and if convicted, that they throw her away under the jail for terminal stupidity.
Why do people think that posting the same question 300 times over is going to get a different result?
Hey you Anon.
Why don't you get a life and stay on topic...
a female
I believe the word you're looking for is 'woman'. We're humans, not livestock.
Nothing like a hefty fine to discourage terroristic threats.
Maybe some judge can get creative and do an eye for an eye: Delay 120 people for 4 hours for an outrageous reason, spend 4 x 120 hours = 20 days in jail.
Airline executives will of course seek immunity before any law is passed to presribe this.
While the questions are coming in:
Where is the policy written and made available to the public concerning taking ice through the checkpoint?
Where is the new policy concerning taking large amounts of cash through the checkpoint?
Where is the video that TSA claims shows Britney Spears beverage being xrayed?
Where is a complete list of rules travelers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint?
Why does TSA take indecent images of children and have TSA employees view these images?
...next...
@Anonymous
You have a lot of questions, do you?
From:
http://www.tsa.gov/311/
Declare larger liquids. Medications, baby formula and food, and breast milk are allowed in reasonable quantities exceeding three ounces and are not required to be in the zip-top bag. Declare these items for inspection at the checkpoint.
Bob, please define exactly what TSA means by reasonable quantities and exactly who makes the decision as to what is reasonable.
Seems to me that the person who needs these items would be in the best postition to know how much of a certain item is needed.
What is the procedure to challenge a TSA decision that a traveler believes is unreasonable while at the checkpoint?
What specific training is provided to TSA employees that gives them the expertise to determine how much of certain items a person may need if TSA determines what a reasonable quantity is?
bob said...
Nothing like a hefty fine to discourage terroristic threats.
Maybe some judge can get creative and do an eye for an eye: Delay 120 people for 4 hours for an outrageous reason, spend 4 x 120 hours = 20 days in jail.
Airline executives will of course seek immunity before any law is passed to presribe this.
####
At that rate, TSA's recommendation for the 2,000,000 passengers per day to arrive an extra hour early is a security tax equivalent to 83333 Americans in jail.
That's a pretty good ROI for the 19 terrorists.
“what if there’s a bomb in my bag?”
sounds like a question, not a threat ;-)
a comedian stated:
We're humans, not livestock.
YARR! We set sail at 3 bells Captain Obvious! ding ding ding!
To all who are annoyed by the repeated questions.
You can blame anon. Or you can blame the person truly responsible; the moderator.
Bob has a convenient way to pump his metrics.
Where is a complete list of rules travelers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint?
Regarding the last paragraph...: With 100% bag matching, wouldn't it be impossible for someone's bag to make their flight without the person boarding, now?
You know, the never ending repeat of questions on policy is getting a little tiring on the comments. I am not an employee of the Gov't nor do I have any vested interest in the TSA. I find this blog helpful in keeping me informed on what is happening. There is not a conspiracy behind every post. Just a bunch of people trying to do thier job. Give 'em a break.
Are you serious? TSA holds up flights for four hours just become some yokel calls in and says there's a bomb? How stupid can they be?
Seems the Delete-O-meter is broken again.
Been stuck on 1546 for several weeks now.
No more deleted post?
copy and paste is fun. also who is checking this blog routinely except tsa employees looking for a laugh on their lunch break?
by the way, anyone picking up the latest US Weekly or People for their flight have zero ground to stand on complaining about the Spears incident.
Isn't there supposed to be 100% bag matching? Shouldn't a person who is not going to make a flight have their bag retrieved anyway, due to this rule? Doesn't TSA publicize 100% bag matching enough for this woman to know her bag "can't possibly make the flight without her?"
Mid week silence?
Another Puppy Post on the way?
Thanks for causing me to miss my flight TSA. From Orlando
Where is the Big Gulp video?
RB… Seems to me that a person who wants to kill others would see their bomb as an item they would be in the best position to know would be needed on the plane.
2,752 individuals DEAD, that is pretty good for 19 terrorists.
Anon said… “Are you serious? TSA holds up flights for four hours just become some yokel calls in and says there's a bomb? How stupid can they be?”
I am sure this individual would not mind getting on board an airplane that had a bomb on it, but, I DO NOT!
TSA is NOT stupid for wanting to protect the American people; they are protecting the American people just like every other law enforcement agency. TSA takes threats seriously, just like every other law enforcement agency in the country.
The bomb threat was called in by someone who was NOT flying; therefore, the individual does not have baggage aboard the flight. The 100% bag matching would not directly apply. The AIRLINE and TSA do not want to take a chance that some crazy person does want to take down a plane. It is in the best interest of both the airline and TSA to want to stop the bombing of an aircraft from happening.
I managed to FINALY get though TSA screening after FIVE WHOLE minutes. I can’t understand why I missed my flight! Thanks a lot TSA. From Orlando!!!
"There is not a conspiracy behind every post. Just a bunch of people trying to do thier job."
If they were doing their jobs, they'd answer the questions completely and honestly.
RB:
In reply to who decides what 'reasonable quantities' are.
I believe the TSO decides, because if you're taking 15 vials of lipstick it might look a little suspecious.
Giving out exact numbers would give those trying to harm us a real advantage, something to meet-or-beat in order to use our own rules against us and take something onboard that could really make passengers have a bad day.
Medications are allowed, but would you need five bottles of Advil for one flight? Most of the time, depending on the duration of the flight, the TSO can understand the need of something and determine it safe for travel.
As for challenging a decision by a TSO, you can ask for their supervisor at any time, and if you feel the decision is wrong or unfair the supervisor will work with you. (They get the training and the pay to do it, and most TSO's won't have a problem with it, if they haven't already called for the supervisor themselves.)
As for the last of it, in relation to training recieved, it's mostly a matter of common sence, as stated above in my examples. Would you need a lot of medication for a short flight, or an excessive amount of baby formula for a short trip? If you have a good reason, the TSO will usually work with you to resolve the problem, it all depeneds on the airport and the TSO who does your bag check.
In the end, TSA is there to help you make it from where you are to where you're going, and they screen every passenger like their own family were going on the flight with you. As with any other agency of this size and scope, federal or corporate, nothing is perfect, but while Americans are in the friendly skies the TSA will be there to make sure you get to your meeting safely, fly safely to your vacation destination, or just make it home safely to your family.
If people really want to help the TSA with their jobs and let them know what you want, tell them at the airport, post it here, and send feedback in all forms to let them know you want a change or to show them a possible better way to do something. The TSA are constantly changing, and if they could mold into the perfect force to make you happy and totally safe, believe me they would, without a doubt do it. So, instead of technical questions and posts about missing flights, just let them know what you think something better would be, or join them and work from the inside.
To 'From Orlando'
I understand, it's not easy or fun missing a flight, but most airlines do tell you to arrive 2 hours early, just in case of traffic at the checkpoint. Remember, TSA works in real time with customers face-to-face, it's not like other corporations or government agencies who sit behind a desk or have layers of bureaucratic ways to work for you, TSA is at the fore-front of the fight on our soil. Because when it comes to having them or not, I say not many people would give up what we now have in place, because you never know what you have 'till it's gone.
ok seriously you people are rediculous..who cares about britany spears??? you guys need to get a life and the bloggers should just stop letting these annoying posts on to the page... stay on topic.. to RB is this a post about liquids and ice?? NO its a post about stupid people making bomb threats go ask liquid questions on the post ABOUT LIQUIDS or the post ABOUT ICE ....
"Are you serious? TSA holds up flights for four hours just become some yokel calls in and says there's a bomb? How stupid can they be?"
"Thanks for causing me to miss my flight TSA. From Orlando"
I'd imagine that your umbrage would be reversed if TSA just let the flight go without checking to see if it was legit or not. Way to misdirect your anger...
"You know, the never ending repeat of questions on policy is getting a little tiring on the comments. "
They should probably answer them then, so he can stop asking.
What is the purpose in having the BDO program? As a frequent flyer I feel the BDO is useless and are frowned upon by TSO's. This is another case of wasteful spending by the government! I constantly witness BDO's standing around, talking on a cell phone, and at times flirting with passengers. I thought these officers were supposed to be observing my behavior? Very professional TSA!
Thanks, Lynn, for the 40-year-old news that joking about bombs is a no-no.
Can you please point out where TSA has publicized the new rules about ice so that the once-a-year travelers over the holidays will be aware that frozen items are now allowed?
Are you serious? TSA holds up flights for four hours just become some yokel calls in and says there's a bomb? How stupid can they be?
-----
Are you serious? You'd rather a plane that had two bomb threats against it not be checked out? Can we make sure you don't get to make screening policies, ever?
I understand the need for security and safety, however sometimes I feel things are taken too far.
It often feels like customs officials make up the rules as they go along- though I am sure that they have guidelines, but woe betide anyone who questions the sensibility of their actions.
I'm interested to hear your response to the failed redaction of your procedure documents. Will you have to change your policies now that this secret information has been released to the public?
Anonymous said...
"With this post Britney's Big Gulp has traveled off the page. Good try. We still want to see the video. Anything else, and we will remain convinced Big Gulp was not X-rayed."
December 1, 2009 4:50 PM
---------------------------------
so what? We hand check many things that do not go through the x-ray, such as film. Heck, I hand checked a painting and it's frame today. Big deal.
Yeah, yeah, they said it went through the x-ray, and you don't believe them. I would have specifically said it did NOT go through the x-ray, even if it did, just to see the blood vessel above your eye begin to throb.
I mean, really, who cares?
But we need to have blogger bob say honest and correct things!!!!
Yeah, right. If Bob says black, you people say white. Up, Bob says, you say down. Left, right; day, night; good, bad.
No matter what bob says you wouldn't believe him.
And no matter what video you could see, you would claim it's edited.
Have fun!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/business/10bug.html?_r=1
Former Administrator Hawley discussion the then new TSA Blog.
“A whole lot of our employees are really anxious to engage with the public,” Mr. Hawley said. And, it turns out, vice versa. After the blog went up on Jan. 30, many reader responses were angry and sarcastic. But later, a greater sense of civil discussion set in.
“We knew we were going to get a big surge of negativity; we knew it would be a very juicy opportunity” for the angry, Mr. Hawley said, adding: “I think once people realize we’re putting substantive content on there and really answering questions, the tone will calm down — and it will lead to the same thing happening at the checkpoint.”
So when will you guys start with the answering questions Mr. Hawley talked about?
If liquids are so dangerous or have the potential to be, why do you just casually toss them into a trash can in the middle of a populated and busy airport? Please answer this Bob!!!
Lonnie said...
Anon said… “Are you serious? TSA holds up flights for four hours just become some yokel calls in and says there's a bomb? How stupid can they be?”
I am sure this individual would not mind getting on board an airplane that had a bomb on it, but, I DO NOT!
TSA is NOT stupid for wanting to protect the American people; they are protecting the American people just like every other law enforcement agency. TSA takes threats seriously, just like every other law enforcement agency in the country.
December 4, 2009 8:44 PM
TSA is not a Law Enforcement Agency.
They screen travlers bags.
Felix said...
RB… Seems to me that a person who wants to kill others would see their bomb as an item they would be in the best position to know would be needed on the plane.
December 4, 2009 8:15 PM
Felix, I was talking about how medically exempted items are handled, not bombs.
If you needed a medicine or such who do you think is most qualified to determine how much you need on your person?
Some TSA employee or you who's life may depend on having that item?
I'm ok with TSA keeping WEI off of airplanes but they don't seem to do that very well either. Look to DFW last month for examples!
John Dawson said...
RB:
In reply to who decides what 'reasonable quantities' are.
I believe the TSO decides, because if you're taking 15 vials of lipstick it might look a little suspecious.
Giving out exact numbers would give those trying to harm us a real advantage, something to meet-or-beat in order to use our own rules against us and take something onboard that could really make passengers have a bad day.
Medications are allowed, but would you need five bottles of Advil for one flight? Most of the time, depending on the duration of the flight, the TSO can understand the need of something and determine it safe for travel.
As for challenging a decision by a TSO, you can ask for their supervisor at any time, and if you feel the decision is wrong or unfair the supervisor will work with you. (They get the training and the pay to do it, and most TSO's won't have a problem with it, if they haven't already called for the supervisor themselves.)
As for the last of it, in relation to training recieved, it's mostly a matter of common sence, as stated above in my examples. Would you need a lot of medication for a short flight, or an excessive amount of baby formula for a short trip? If you have a good reason, the TSO will usually work with you to resolve the problem, it all depeneds on the airport and the TSO who does your bag check.....
...............................
Lipstick is neither a medicine or food John, just in case you don't know.
I'm talking about items that should be exempted based on information available on the TSA web pages. I stated that clearly in the original posting.
John, you hear about any of the flights that have been delayed on the ground for any number of hours with the passengers held hostage on an aircraft or have their travel plans disrupted because of weather or other issues and forced to wait out the problem at a distant airport?
One of those was a very short flight yet the people were held hostage overnight. Most without basic things needed for themselves or their children.
When a person is dealing with medicines or special food for a child or themselves I don't think any TSA employee is trained nor equipped to make those decisions, unless your have a medical license.
Are you willing to take legal responsibility for not allowing someones medicine?
Anonymous said...
Seems the Delete-O-meter is broken again.
Been stuck on 1546 for several weeks now.
No more deleted post?
December 3, 2009 4:37 PM
........................
Amazing deleted post jump by 160 in 5 short days.
3 Dec = 1546
8 Dec = 1706
Someone must of been real busy punching the delete button.
"TSA is NOT stupid for wanting to protect the American people; they are protecting the American people just like every other law enforcement agency. TSA takes threats seriously, just like every other law enforcement agency in the country.
TSA is NOT a law enforcement agency. Never has been, never will be.
TSA does make a mockery of the concept of taking threats seriously. Everything is a threat, except its own pathetic mistakes.
You can protect people without abusing them or insulting their intelligence. The problem resides in the lack of social skills of some of the TSOs. TSA should try treating people with respect and courtesy, they would get respect in return.
RB:
I don't believe the TSA can take medication. I think it's their policy that you can take medication with you on the plane.
Anyways, if we got to make all of the choices for the measurements and TSA couldn't say no or take a second look, then I'm taking a lifetime supply of my nitroglycerin pills with me on the plane I could easily make an explosive. So, with your logic, flawed that it is, I could easily say that they don't understand that where I'm moving, the price is about 1 cent higher and that over my lifetime I will save about thirty dollars, and since we know better than those protecting us, I'll get by with it, right RB? Yes, I know I'm right, because I'm in the twisted world of RB, and I know better than everyone else.
So, what else could I take with me? What else could I exclude from the list of TSA to the list of "I KNOW BETTER" and lets see how long our security lasts, lets see how long people keep flying, like a test of sorts where people die and I score points for your broken reality RB.
Anyways, since I'm through with you and that twisted mentality, it's just as well that I'll be flying tomorrow. I'll be posting before, during (wifi on flight, yeah), and after the flight thanks to the TSA, and not thanks to the RB and those like him know best and the world is full of pink flowers and the people who would happily kill us are all gone.
The end.
Perhaps they could have been prompter to the gate (perhaps not), but how about airlines just give them their dumb bag back and be done with it if they're not allowed to board, rather than causing people to make silly or irresponsible statements about why they need their luggage back (besides the obvious reasons)?
"Lonnie said ...
TSA is not a Law Enforcement Agency.
They screen travlers bags.
December 8, 2009 11:48 AM"
//
FAMs are also under the TSA umbrella.
[part 1 of 7: First sumbitted 2009-12-05T1030: My comments have not been approved recently, though I'm confident that they do not violate the TSA Blog's comment policy. I've previously posted this comment, and am re-posting it after converting to Markdown. Each link is enclosed in brackets, followed by a number in brackets. Normally, URIs for each of these would be included at the end of the document. Instead, I'll follow this post with one for each link. Thus, TSA's moderator(s) can deny my post in part as deemed appropriate.]
Oyun Oyna [wrote][1]:
"Where is a complete list of rules travelers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint?"
They refuse to publish that list, so we are required to follow rules we are not able to read in order to avoid having our freedom of movement restricted. I plan to use the Freedom of Information Act to attempt to retrieve those rules, then publish them. If you'd like to help craft the request, discuss it, or be alerted to updates, please see my December 5, 2009, post to FlyerTalk Forums, "[FOIA request for rules TSA requires passengers follow at airport checkpoint; advice?][2]". You may also be interested in the future results of my [June, 2009, FOIA request][3] (still [pending as of December 2, 2009][4]) for a description of procedures TSA staff use at airport checkpoints when searching and interrogating people who are stopped by their staff at those checkpoints.
--
Phil
[Arrested][5] at ABQ airport TSA checkpoint November 2009
No comment at this time. Fight back: donate to my [legal defense fund][6]
I guess I would be in the minority to say I hope this incredibly bad decision doesn't ruin her life. Every threat, even from babbling children, should be taken seriously but I hope her life isn't ruined because of her ignorance.
Admit it - you screwed up.
RB said...
When a person is dealing with medicines or special food for a child or themselves I don't think any TSA employee is trained nor equipped to make those decisions, unless your have a medical license.
-------------
With that argument any person that has a child or a medical condition should not be allowed to make those decisions without a medical license. Its all about common sense and experience. About 80% of TSOs are parents, they don't have enough knowledge on how much food a baby needs? probably 60% of those employees have underlying medical conditions and 100% of those employees deal with them daily at work with passengers that do have those conditions. They don't have enough experience or knowledge to make that decision?
Phil said...
[part 1 of 7: First sumbitted 2009-12-05T1030: My comments have not been approved recently, though I'm confident that they do not violate the TSA Blog's comment policy. I've previously posted this comment, and am re-posting it after converting to Markdown. Each link is enclosed in brackets, followed by a number in brackets. Normally, URIs for each of these would be included at the end of the document. Instead, I'll follow this post with one for each link. Thus, TSA's moderator(s) can deny my post in part as deemed appropriate.]
Oyun Oyna [wrote][1]:
"Where is a complete list of rules travelers must comply with to move through a TSA checkpoint?"
They refuse to publish that list, so we are required to follow rules we are not able to read in order to avoid having our freedom of movement restricted. I plan to use the Freedom of Information Act to attempt to retrieve those rules, then publish them. If you'd like to help craft the request, discuss it, or be alerted to updates, please see my December 5, 2009, post to FlyerTalk Forums, "[FOIA request for rules TSA requires passengers follow at airport checkpoint; advice?][2]". You may also be interested in the future results of my [June, 2009, FOIA request][3] (still [pending as of December 2, 2009][4]) for a description of procedures TSA staff use at airport checkpoints when searching and interrogating people who are stopped by their staff at those checkpoints.
--
Phil
[Arrested][5] at ABQ airport TSA checkpoint November 2009
No comment at this time. Fight back: donate to my [legal defense fund][6]
December 10, 2009 1:08 PM
------------
Have you not been to TSA.gov or read any of the signs at the checkpoints? How about asking the officers working at the checkpoint? "Excuse me sir, What am I supposed to do to get through this security checkpoint?" I bet you would get an answer. If your talking about getting through without getting a bag search or a pat down thats impossible. They call them random screenings for a reason and do them very frequently. If you say you get it every time you go through then I would say bad luck. Even if you were the perfect passenger do every thing right and don't break any rules you can still get searched, its just gonna happen. Sorry but thats just how it is, there is no secret no getting searched rule.
"They don't have enough experience or knowledge to make that decision?"
No, they don't.
TSOWilliamReed writes:
About 80% of TSOs are parents, they don't have enough knowledge on how much food a baby needs?
"A" baby? Sure. My baby? No. You don't know my baby's medical history. You don't know what my baby's physician has instructed me to do in order to properly care for my baby's health. How are you in a position to judge what is reasonable for me?
Are TSO's even aware of what my return itinerary is to help them determine how much of a medical or nutritional liquid I or my baby need?
Also, I followed a link from follow-up email and the link was bad. Que sera. But when I used the www.tsa.gov search box, the results came up from fema.gov. Other than being under DHS, what is the link between these agencies?
Have you not been to TSA.gov or read any of the signs at the checkpoints? How about asking the officers working at the checkpoint? "Excuse me sir, What am I supposed to do to get through this security checkpoint?" I bet you would get an answer. If your talking about getting through without getting a bag search or a pat down thats impossible. They call them random screenings for a reason and do them very frequently. If you say you get it every time you go through then I would say bad luck. Even if you were the perfect passenger do every thing right and don't break any rules you can still get searched, its just gonna happen. Sorry but thats just how it is, there is no secret no getting searched rule.
December 11, 2009 5:42 PM
When asking how to get through a TSA checkpoint why can't different TSA employees give the same answers? There are rules, right?
As far as breaking these rules just where are those rules published for public consumption?
Surely if I must comply with certain rules I should know what they are. How would anyone expect compliance if they don't tell what the rules are?
RB said...
Have you not been to TSA.gov or read any of the signs at the checkpoints? How about asking the officers working at the checkpoint? "Excuse me sir, What am I supposed to do to get through this security checkpoint?" I bet you would get an answer. If your talking about getting through without getting a bag search or a pat down thats impossible. They call them random screenings for a reason and do them very frequently. If you say you get it every time you go through then I would say bad luck. Even if you were the perfect passenger do every thing right and don't break any rules you can still get searched, its just gonna happen. Sorry but thats just how it is, there is no secret no getting searched rule.
December 11, 2009 5:42 PM
When asking how to get through a TSA checkpoint why can't different TSA employees give the same answers? There are rules, right?
As far as breaking these rules just where are those rules published for public consumption?
Surely if I must comply with certain rules I should know what they are. How would anyone expect compliance if they don't tell what the rules are?
----------------
If its that much of an issue then ask the officers at each airport you go through. If the rules are different they will tell you, they aren't going to make you break the rules on purpose. The rules are all there, on the signs and at the tsa.gov website. Anything else is personal airport managment specifications and the officers should be letting you know at the checkpoint. Also you need to remember that with random screening procedures and other things, there is no way for anyone to go through security 100% of the time without being searched in some way. It is just not going to happen no matter what the rules are.
OK, TSO William Reed, what do I have to do to get through YOUR checkpoint? I am willing to take off my shoes, but I must sit down to do so. I am concerned that my possessions should never be out of my sight. I do not wish to go through the full body scanner thing, and will accept a pat down, provided it does not get too intrusive. I do not wish to be yelled at for any reason, nor do I wish to be spoken to as if I were an idiot. What can you do, TSO William Reed, to help me through this process.
TSOWilliamReed said...
RB said...
December 11, 2009 5:42 PM
When asking how to get through a TSA checkpoint why can't different TSA employees give the same answers? There are rules, right?
If its that much of an issue then ask the officers at each airport you go through. If the rules are different they will tell you, they aren't going to make you break the rules on purpose. The rules are all there, on the signs and at the tsa.gov website. Anything else is personal airport managment specifications and the officers should be letting you know at the checkpoint. Also you need to remember that with random screening procedures and other things, there is no way for anyone to go through security 100% of the time without being searched in some way. It is just not going to happen no matter what the rules are.
December 16, 2009 10:59 AM
...................
The rules should be the same at every airport checkpoint. How you screen people and property is information travelers don't need.
Shoes on the belt, ice or any other topic should be implemented exactly the same at each airport.
You say check the TSA website for information.
Tell me what the TSA website says about shoes on the bel?
Or what the TSA website says about people taking ice through the checkpoint?
Or why the signs at TSA checkpoints say 3.0 ounces of liquids and not 3.4oz/100ml?
I don't think anyone at TSA can make a consolidated policy statement that applies to every airport.
And that is a problem.
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1049.shtm
Well here is this on checkpoint screening. No mention of shoes on the belt.
http://www.tsa.gov/approach/black_diamond.shtm
This page actually mentions shoes going in the bin.
Shoes in the bin or out of the bin? Not on the TSA website apparently because the officers at the checkpoint should be informing you of this rule and doing it however their airports managment wants. Does it really matter? I don't really think so its just shoes in the bin our out its not going to get you additional screening or anything like that.
ICE THROUGH THE CHECKPOINT!!!
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm
Right on this page it says everything about ice.
I can answer the 3.0 - 3.4 oz thing. It is because we live in America, simple as that. Origionally the rule was 3.0 oz. However after some confusion with the rest of the world (because everyone else uses metric) the limit was changed to 3.4 oz or 100ml. Really the limit is 100ml but this is america so the size must be in oz. Wether the container size limit was 3.0 or 3.4 didn't matter because it all still has to fit in 1 quart size plastic baggy so people are still only allowed the same amount of liquid on board.
And I agree with the same policies at different airports statment. But honestly its expected. Each airport has to function differently wether its due to environment or passenger flow. Look at us in south east alaska, I ride a boat for 15 min to get to work every day we have special rules for attendance other airports don't have. Other agencies are the same way, you can't expect every coast guard, airforce, army, fbi, or police station to be ran exactly the same way. It just doesn't work like that.
TSOWilliamReed: you fell into the trap. Let's look at your responses:
Well here is this on checkpoint screening. No mention of shoes on the belt.
At LAX (and elsewhere), screeners say shoes must be on the belt. You say it's a customer choice. There's no TSA webpage on the topic. How do I know you're right and LAX is wrong? Unless maybe LAX is right and you're wrong? How do I know the difference?
Does it really matter? I don't really think so its just shoes in the bin our out its not going to get you additional screening or anything like that.
Can you promise that? Plenty of passengers have been threatened with arrest for "interfering with the screening process" for asserting their rights at a TSA checkpoint.
And, yes, ultimately the question of how shoes should be handled is pretty trivial. But if TSA can't consistently handle something as simple as shoe handling, what kind of faith should we have in their ability to handle more complicated matters?
http://www.tsa.gov/311/311-carry-ons.shtm
Right on this page it says everything about ice.
The webpage only says that ice is allowable if you need it to keep another exempt item (e.g. medication) cold. This doesn't square with the Britney Spears event, where she walked through the checkpoint with a glass of ice.
So, what's the real rule? The rule on the webpage, or what Bob said on the blog? More importantly, how can I figure out who is right and who is wrong?
Really the limit is 100ml but this is america so the size must be in oz.
We buy soda in the U.S. in two-liter bottles. Solid medicinal items (vitamins, prescription drugs, etc.) are measured in the U.S. in milligrams. Somehow, we all manage to deal with the metric system just fine; to suggest that the U.S. public couldn't deal with the metric system if required to do so is patronizing at best.
(Oh, and by the way ... plenty of Americans use the metric system all the time without difficulty. They're called Canadians, and Mexicans, and Brazilians, and so on. "America" isn't synonymous with the U.S., nor should it be.)
Each airport has to function differently wether its due to environment or passenger flow.
Either an item is a weapon or it's not. It shouldn't matter whether you're in Ketchikan or Cleveland when you're trying to figure out if a given item is a weapon and therefore prohibited. That's what we're asking for regarding consistency.
Thank God I was not at the Miami Airport that day. It is unbelievable how people think.
Why not require airlines to arrange seats for those in the watchlist so that such suspected person be surrounded by men or able-bodied or courageous women? In this case, it is easier to avert any attempt to cause terrorist acts inside the plane; or sit such person near the aisle so he is easily noticed, and never let him sit alone on a row. We get the list, so why don't we take advantage of that. If suspect is not in the list but has foreign origin, surround him with men who live or reside in the United States. We should encourage all passengers to be ever watchful; if a prize can be given just to get that required vigilance, why not? (probably give the person a tax credit... or anything that rewards him/her).
"We’ve also had more than a few people say “what if there’s a bomb in my bag?” when they get to the gate too late to board their flight and want to get their checked bag back."
Whoa, hey! That's *completely different* from calling or e-mailing in a bomb threat! "What if there were a bomb in my bag?" is a legitimate question, given that checking a bag and then "arriving too late for the flight" is a well-known technique of NON-suicidal terrorists.
Maybe I'm just showing my age, but *I thought that had been dealt with*! By *not letting people's checked bags fly without them*! I remember many announcements to this effect. What gives?
Bob you babysit a strange blog here. I feel for ya bro! Armchair quarterbacks just get calluses on their southernmost support systems. The worst part is folks like the woman in this story are breeding daily. Carry on...
One of my most recent flights was an experience. A pocket knife was confiscated by TSA at SFO. This pocket knife had a blade length of about 2.5 inches.
This same pocket knife has travelled with me all over the country over the last few years, and in a couple of cases was held in the hands of TSA agents at security checkpoints in a couple of different airports, then placed back in a carry-on bag in which was located. The TSA agent in charge at SFO told me that ALL knives have ALWAYS been prohibited items, since the very creation of the TSA. If that is the case, what explains my previous experiences with TSA agents in different locations at different times?
I am NOT a Muslim and am therefore not a terrorist or any kind of threat to anyone on an airplane, in an airport, or anywhere else except in a polling booth.
Quote: "I am NOT a Muslim and am therefore not a terrorist or any kind of threat to anyone on an airplane, in an airport, or anywhere else except in a polling booth."
What type of rhetoric is this? Are you implying that only "Muslims" can be terrorist? But to the point, a young lady's future maybe damaged for making dumb choices.
I guess I would be in the minority to say I hope this incredibly bad decision doesn't ruin her life. Every threat, even from babbling children, should be taken seriously but I hope her life isn't ruined because of her ignorance.
I do agree with one of the commenter who said that the problem lies in poor social skills and knowing how to treat people with respect. Some people these days just lack that social intelligence and will take extreme measure at the expense of others to get what they want.
It's just the policy that they have to take these threats serious.
The first commenter raised some great questions about the liquid policy.
I still struggle with the cell phone policy... but I guess that's not a TSA thing, per se.
If cell phones were really dangerous, would we even be allowed to take them at all?
Great points about the stern 'liquid policy' rules. It's something we've always struggled with, both on a business level with small deliveries and transports, and on a personal level with our individual travel.
There surely can't be any way that the negative impact of the policy on passengers can outweigh the good of supposed terrorist threats in that area?
I think we've thrown out the baby with the bath water on this one; playing right into the terrorist hands.
Things have gotten a bit extreme, I know 3 times that my Juice Plus+ bottles were opened because they weren't sealed, and those are just capsules. We either need much more advanced technology that doesn't interfere with the normal flow of travel, or we need to lighten up. The only other possibility is the use of background checks as a means of flagging some travelers, but even that is an extreme, an invasion of privacy. We are either faced with the reality of the system we have, or we must deal with the higher risk. If even just 1% of the world is prone to doing evil, that's not so bad with a population of 1,000. But 6 Billion people on the planet equates to 60 million potential people to worry about. These numbers have no basis but are meant to represent a point that the more populated our planet gets, the more potential for big disasters...human instigated or natural. But we don't need a dictatorship or fascist state either.
Post a Comment