The TSA and international airport security define substances most people consider to be solids or gasses as liquids, including aerosols, gels, creams, and pastes. Any liquids that don't meet these limitations cannot go through security and will be thrown away or confiscated. All 3.4-ounce containers must fit into a clear one-quart bag: that’s the first “1.” Only one bag is allowed per passenger (that’s the last “1” in 3-1-1). The “3” in the 3-1-1 rule refers to the 3.4 ounce limit. 3.4 ounces may seem like an odd amount, but it’s to keep TSA rules consistent with international regulations, which allow for 100 milliliters (3.4 ounces) per container. The TSA’s fluid limit rule for carry-on liquids stipulates you can carry no more than 3.4 ounces per container of liquid. Since then, the TSA has limited the amount of liquid passengers can bring onto planes to containers no larger than 3.4 ounces, a regulation commonly called the 3-1-1 rule. The plan was to smuggle bomb materials onto planes using plastic drink bottles. In 2006, Briain, the U.S., and Pakistan security foiled a plot by al-Qaeda operatives to set off bombs on airplanes using liquid explosives. It's absurd.The TSA fluid limit for carry-on luggage exists for a reason. Which is to say, 'nothing', because there are essentially no penalties for TSA employees who are caught stealing, even repeatedly. Jurisdiction-dependent, of course - but police have to meet a much higher bar to pat people down than the TSA do. Not to mention, the penalties for them losing a piece of luggage that has a declared firearm inside it are way worse than the penalties for when they steal something from your luggage. If you pack a gun (even a flare gun will do), you are required to lock it with a lock for which only you hold the key, and the TSA cannot open it without calling the police in case they need to look inside. Incidentally, packing a gun in your checked luggage is supposedly the best way to make sure nothing ever gets stolen. The TSA is not allowed to touch weapons, and the police are not allowed to perform the sorts of pat-downs that the TSA provides. > I'm not sure if TSA is allowed to touch weapons, but they refused to attempt to handle this item even after police arrived. If airport security was run by a private company, the government could fire these guys and go with a different vendor if there was enough political pressure (or threaten to to get needed reforms), but because the TSA is the government, we're stuck with them. More than likely these managers are just ex-shitheads who played the game better than the other shitheads in the past and got promoted. They're not going to be the fall guy here. Especially when the higher ups are riding the pension/public sector union bus and anything that could risk that or cause a political issue is just ignored. The real question is who can fix this? In government, perverse incentives eventually become the norm, not the exception, as everyone eventually gets in the game and there's no reason for anyone to upset the cart. I'm certain this guy knew it was a toy, but he wanted that gold star and his supervisor wanted a report showing all the gold stars that month were from his guys. People learn to game the system and their supervisors don't care as long as there's a benefit to them. >Some shit head got a gold star for "finding a weapon" and I get fucked.Įverything about security and law enforcement has some level of perverse incentives. TSA didn't even bother with the swabs or sniffer dog.īottom line is that TSA agents have no skin in the game, if they miss dangerous items it's the passengers who suffer the loss, not the agents standing safely at their posts on the ground at the airport. We all learned something that day, they learned that big ten-pound chocolate bars are a real thing and I learned that terrorists can probably carry bombs on board as long as they are sealed in a Ghirardelli box. I was worried they were going to want to open the package which was a gift and I didn't want them all riled up. The supervisor and the girl came back and I laughed and said 'clearly you have spotted my giant chocolate bar', and volunteered all the standard answers (yes I packed this myself, it's been with me the whole time, etc) and they calmed down. For those that don't know, big chocolate bars are organic material and look like explosives and I've seen this happen before - I was waiting to see the reaction. The poor girl doing the screening seemed to think an explosion was imminent and was visibly distressed, quickly leaving her post and grabbing a supervisor. I flew from Atlanta a while back with a bunch of Trader Joe's 'Pound Plus' chocolate bars and a ten pound (!) Ghirardelli chocolate bar in my carry-on which got quite a reaction.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |