USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

Liquids, Part 2

Archived Content

Please note that older content is archived for public record. This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.

If you have questions about policies or procedures, please contact the TSA Contact Center.

Members of the news media may contact TSA Public Affairs.

Thursday, January 31, 2008

Liquids cover 70% of the earth and they also make up a good percentage of our comments from the traveling public. Post your suggestions and concerns about liquids in this blog post. (Click here for Part 1) Refresh your knowledge of traveling with liquids .

So, how much damage could a liquid explosive cause? See for yourself from the Myth Busters page on TSA.gov:

» Click here to see our video (wmv, streaming).

Comments

Submitted by Mike P on

The way we handle the confiscated liquids proves how disfunctional our government is. What do they do with this potentially hazardous liquid? Do they turn it over to the bomb squad? Put it in a secure container? No. They put it in a trash container right where they are standing, and eventially turn it over to the local trash hauler. If anyone really thought that they would find explosives and hazardous materials in passanger carry-ons they certainly would not handle the confiscated materials in such a fashion. Just another example of the government spinning its wheels. I am convinced that we are no safer today than we were pre 9/11

Submitted by Anonymous on

I know this is redundant because 99% of travelers think the 3 oz rule is ridiculous but add me to the list. Me and my father travel ALOT and run on tight schedules when we do so and checking our bags is a nuisance to our scheduling. We can no longer carry on our bags anymore because of shampoo and aerosol deoderants that are too large for the 3 oz rule. Like most other travelers, we do not feel any safer by this rule we simply feel annoyed at the TSA and our government.

Submitted by Jim P on

Why is it that a tube of toothpaste > 3.0 oz weight is confiscated? The 3-1-1 policy clearly states that the 3.4 oz rule is by volume (see http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm) - not weight. Toothpaste is measured by weight in the US, by volume in other nations... I recently purchased a 4.4 oz tube of Crest in South America that was also listed as 88 mL. Because of the *weight* of the toothpaste marked on the package, the toothpaste was confiscated, despite being under the *volume* limit... Seems like any tubes of toothpaste under about 5 oz should be within TSA guidelines...

Submitted by Anonymous on

So I understand TSA is just trying to keep people safe, but seriously, this thing about liquids is so incredibly obnoxious. What's the difference between a 3 oz. bottle and an 8 oz.? Why can't there just be a rule that all liquids get scanned and do away with the size limit? Also, I think we should be allowed to bring things like yogurt through security. It's sealed! You can check to see if it's tampered with! Why do you have to throw it away? And why do you have to deprive me of my water? I think we need to re-examine our security measures. El Al (the Israeli airline) is one of the safest airlines to fly on. Maybe we should take a page from their book. . .

Submitted by Neelie on

I have always carried my liquids in a clear vinyl container that zips and truly protects the liquids from spilling. No bottle will hold more than 3 oz. I had no problem bringing it through West Palm Beach and have had no problems with it at O'Hare, Ft. Lauderdale and Midway. It allows the TSA to properly observe what is in this carrier.

When coming home from Dallas in January, it was almost confiscated. This would have upset me as it was quite expensive. The TSA employee at DFW said "this isn't a quart bag". "What do you not understand about using a quart bag?"

When I tried to explain that it allowed him to see everything in it and he certainly could unzip it (no more difficult than opening a quart bag) he began to confiscate it until someone else told him to let me go and not take it.

Not only, is it more secure than a quart bag, it is as accessible! It would be nice if your employees all followed the same rules.

Flying has become so difficult that one does not want to go anywhere that involves a flight, all because of SOME OF YOUR EMPLOYEES.

I'm a small Jewish Grandmother. I hardly fit the "profile" of a terrorist. I see my grandchildren less and less because of TSA!

Eileen Penta aka Neelie

Submitted by TC on

I support the original idea behind this, but think it's rather impractical as it is now.

I was just told the other day by a TSA that saline was actually allowed. I have been checking luggage I never would have otherwise because of saline. Yes, it's on the Web site, but I just now am looking at the Web site. Instead of all those 3-1-1 signs, I think that information should have been posted as well. I use a specific brand because I have very sensitive eyes, and they just do not make it in a "small" size. It's a large bottle or nothing. This is good news for me as my luggage was lost on my last flight, and I have no desire to check luggage again for a long, long time.

Some airports actually have the quart-size baggies to give away for you to put your liquids in. That's nice. I, too, have had them miss liquids. I took an old backpack with my laptop in it last summer, never even realizing I had a bottle of hand sanitizer in it. They never took it, and I was in and out of 4 airports that weekend. Some consistency would be nice.

I also would very much like to know why some places allow you to fill small bottles with shampoo, etc. (which most of us do because travel size are so much more expensive than buying empty bottles and simply refilling) and those aren't checked, just their size is. Maybe we should be a little less worried about size of liquids and more worried about contents?

Submitted by Anonymous on

My husband and I travel a lot so we have the quart sized bags with little travel sized bottles and go through security without any problems.

My problem is that even after going through security you are not allowed to bring beverages that you have purchased INSIDE airport security check points onto the airline. The rationale is that "well maybe you managed to smuggle some explosive through security and have now transferred it to the new container." But that argument makes no sense. If the TSA did their jobs that shouldn't happen and essentially states that even with all the whoopty-doo about airport security the airlines don't believe that TSA is doing a good enough job. Secondly, if someone did manage to smuggle an illegal substance through security why would they call attention to it by transferring it to another container prior to when they wanted to "use" it? It defies logic.

And while most policies are merely inconvenient this one can actually put someone’s health at risk. Long before this policy came into being people were already at a risk for deep vein thrombosis and the consequent risk of pulmonary embolism. Now that we are being fluid restricted this risk has gone way up. Not only have the airlines not compensated for the new policy by offering plenty of fluids on flights, in fact, some airlines have started charging for water!! When this policy was written it should have had a provision mandating that either beverages purchased inside airport security check points were allowed on airlines or that airlines had to provide a certain minimum volume of beverages per hour to prevent that risk. But that hasn't happened. One of these days someone is going to die on a long flight of a PE because they did not have access to adequate fluid on the flight.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Just took a 45 minute flight from Harlingen,Tx to San Antonio on Wednesday, and was asked to throw out my toothpaste, (travel-size!) and my lens solution just because I didn't have the 1 quart baggie. Granted, it's my fault that I forgot the baggie, but that doesn't excuse the rude and condecending behavior from the screeners! THIS HAS GOT TO STOP!

Submitted by Audioliquor on

My main problem is that I cannot bring cheap bottled water on the planes now, and airlines are SO MEAN about giving you extra water on board. I feel abused that even if I want to carry water from home, they would throw it out, give me a hard time for it, then charge me extra money to buy new ones at the airport/on the plane. It just screams CORPORATE PLOT to me, squeezing pennies from middle class people.

Submitted by Douglas on

I just came back from a long flight from Europe with a 4 year-old. Not to be allowed water and then having the unopened can of juice we had received on the plane taken from us was very inconvenient, tosay the least. We had a 3-hr layover and had to spring $2 for a small bottle of water!
Also, because of not being allowed to lock your checked bags, my jewelry was stolen on another trip. Sure, it shouldn't have been in the checked bag, but it was put there by accident. I definitely did not expect thieves among the employees of AA or TSA, whoever took my things!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Okay, okay, enough of this liquid stuff. I just got back and had my water confiscated. It was an unopened bottle, still factory sealed. I usually can't even get these open, much less tamper with them in any way. I am a small, caucasian woman, 5' about 90 lbs. Do I really look like I would do something terroristic? I thought not. How 'bout some profiling here? I really believe that the whole water bottle idea is a scam to make you buy airport water at about $2.00 a bottle. Who exactly gets the proceeds from this scam? I want my cut! And I am wondering, what exactly does it take to make a liquid bomb? From the descriptions on the net, basically anything that you can carry on could potentially be used. So, why not just ban carry ons?
C'mon people. Let's use some of that "government intelligence" to actually do some good and quit harassing innocent travelers! BRING BACK THE WATER!

Submitted by Anonymous on

So I dont think that it necessarily makes economic sense to require passengers to throw out their bottles of water. When you can get a 12 pack of water at the grocery store for 3-5 bucks and it costs 2-3 at one of those airport stores, esentially you are creating a monopsony with these little stores. Why can't you put brita water stations by the media charge stations - so that regardless of what airport you are in you can have access to clean drinking water just bring your own bottle( the water out of some of the drinking fountains in airports are gross).

Submitted by Anonymous on

I understand security and am all for it; however, you need to think of alternatives regarding the liquid policy. If going on a short trip, I could just take a carry on and did not have to worry about checking baggage. Well, that convenience went away with the new liquid policy. Therefore, I need you, TSA, to come up with an alternative means for checking our liquids so we don't have to worry about checking our baggage. The little ounce requirement is not enough for those short flights. I find it annoying that the only reason I have to check my baggage is because I need more lotion, shampoo, conditioner, etc than the policy allows.

Submitted by Frustrated on

Last year in Houston, I'd forgotten to take my mini-sized hand sanitizer out of my purse and put it into a plastic bag (I travel internationally quite a lot, and I arrived into Houston from Quito, Ecuador with it in my purse the whole time, however, after arriving, I had to switch terminals and go through security again). After waiting in a long line, I finally got through only to then get "selected." At this point, the TSA person rifled around in my stuff and then pulled out this 1-oz container of hand sanitizer which was almost completely empty. He said he had to take it because it wasn't in a plastic bag. I felt this was ridiculous due to the size and the fact that I had absolutely no other liquids in my possession. I asked if I could just use up the remaining amount there in front of him. He said no. I asked if I could squirt the remaining amount into the garbage can right next to him so I could keep my container (I can't find them anywhere for sale anymore...which is a shame). He said no. I said, okay, well, I happen to have a plastic bag which I can put it in and you can pass it through the x-ray machine again. He said no. The only solution he offered was for me to go to the very end of the line (it was a long, long, long line) and come back through with it in the plastic bag. How ridiculous is that?! The agents should be taught to use their brains and common sense. What difference does it make at that point whether I have 0.5 ounces of a liquid inside a plastic bag or outside of a plastic bag? It's 0.5 ounces of hand sanitizer!!! Safety and protection are one thing...what's currently happening with TSA is another. It's ridiculous.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I just think it's crazy that I can't bring a SEALED, UNOPENED soda or bottle of water onto an airplane. If it's sealed, then it's straight from the factory and is no different than the same soda or water that they sell in the secured area of the airport. And the airport businesses will happily charge me ten times more for it than I paid at the grocery store.

Submitted by Frustrated on

The beginning of this month I returned to the US from a business trip to Quito, Ecuador. I unfortunately had to fly Delta (I hate Delta and their so-called service and have for over a decade and avoid them whenever possible). So I get to the gate security screening--hand checks of all carry-ons and then a wand check front and back side of every single person...extreme and ridiculous...since we'd all already passed through security with the alarm sensor and the x-ray belt--and I had no liquids at all whatsoever in my carry-ons. Instead, the person pulls from my bag an empty 12-oz water bottle and says it's not allowed. I was shocked. I've flown internationally and domestically quite a lot, and I've never come across this. I said "It's empty!" And they said that it didn't matter, that there was the utmost strictness of screening for Delta flights because they were going to be arriving into the US, and it wasn't allowed. I said again, "It's empty!!!" and they said "Well, you could mix something together and use this to do it," and in my amazement, I said "With what?! You've just gone through all my belongings...what do I have that could be mixed?!!!" Their response "I don't know." I said again, "But IT'S EMPTY!!!!!! I arrived from the US into Quito with that same bottle." Their question was if I flew in on Delta. I said no, I flew in on Continental (which is what I usually fly), and they said that Delta was more strict. Ridiculous. I had to throw away an empty water bottle because it wasn't allowed. Ludicrous. And since then I've looked up policy for the liquids ban and I see absolutely nothing about not being able to carry empty water bottles in your carry-on when flying into the US. TSA people should be taught to use their brains and common sense. This whole thing is asinine.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Last year at this time I traveled on my first international flight, and had to leave behind my travel size contact solution because it was just over the allowable size container. I don't mind decanting other things I need on the plane, but the stores don't sell contact solution in a small enough container to agree with the requirements. I can't decant the contact solution without risking an eye infection. So I got several eye drop containers and used that instead. My other problem was on the way back, I became very dehydrated because I couldn't bring a regular purchased water bottle on the plane. It was taken away at both international airports. I had been through the metal detector checkpoint, but a second screening with regular tables was set up at the gates, and both times they took away my unopened water bottles that I had purchased after going thru the intitial security. It was an awful trip back.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I am wondering when TSA and the airlines are going to come up with a plan for travelers who come from overseas will be allowed to bring back ETOH, perfumes, etc that is not available in the US. There are limits to what you can bring back, but then you can not hand carry them on the planes.

There should be a system put in place by TSA and ALL airlines where passengers can purchase these otems and then have them placed in a safe container of some sort and then upon arrival back in the US, they are passed onto the customers.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I used to be able to carry a train case with my toiletries while I travel. I take a lot of medications and use a lot of toiletries (i.e. hairspray, makeup, etc.). When I put my liquids in my check in bag, I always have at least one leak...eww! I really wish I could use my train case for my toiletries again, so nothing leaks and I can do my hair and makeup when I arrive at my destination. Can't they just hold a little white disk over it and make sure my girly things and my meds are really what they say they are?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Regular travellers acting clueless are my main gripe. Recent trip a few weeks ago, the business woman in front of me declared in a very snotty, annoyed voice that she "wasn't told" to take her quart size bag of liquids out of her bag before sending it through the x-ray machine. The only thing the TSA person said (neutrally) was "Um, ma'am, there are liquids in your bag." I don't necessarily agree with nor understand the TSA liquids policy, but acting out and holding up the line doesn't help the rest of us stuck behind you!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Enforcing the no-liquids policy is another hassle that is not worth the effort.

Submitted by Anonymous on

We are lucky TSA lets us carry any liquid on board an airplane, I saw a video where to liquids were mixed together, a total of one ounce, a toothpick was then dipped into the liquid, only the tip, and then put into a pen. A match was placed inside of the pen and the pen was then stuck into a watermelon and lit. The watermelon vanshied once the liquid ignited. Hence the need to control the amount of liquids brought on broad an aircraft.

Submitted by Anonymous on

WATER!!! If you are going to continue to confiscate water, I really feel that you should supply people with coupons for one bottle of water redeemable at airport stores or provide bottles of water just beyond security. Shampoo, I can live without, but WATER! I cannot afford to buy a $2 bottle of water everytime I go to the airport and yet, it is important to stay hydrated especially when you are flying. I sent this exact same comment to the TSA directly (not on this blog) and they replied to me by saying that I should take my "business ideas" to their site for business partners. That was irritating. Please please please supply water.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I was flying with my wife and two kids 1 18 month old and 6 month old. WE had one water bottle that was unopened for my 6 month old formula and it was confiscated. We walked 10 steps past security and there was stores selling the same water for unreasonable prices. Was it actually security or the airlines trying to make a quick buck.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"I wish I'd known about this site earlier, after flying out of Santa Barbara and having my entire bag of makeup, lipstick, moisturizer, all of it, confiscated."

The same thing happened to me. I was out of town a few years back when the whole "liquid bomb" issue came around and had to fly back home (before I had even heard about it on the news, actually. Needless to say, I figured out something was up when the airport was a MESS). Subsequently, all of my shampoo, conditioner, soap, and (Expensive!) makeup was confiscated. I realize at the time that it was a pressing issue and they were still figuring out how to deal with it. But now, years later, I have had liquid makeup confiscated all the same, despite that I separated it into the clear plastic bag and it was the correct amount to be traveling with.

How is stealing my goods making anyone safer?

Submitted by Anonymous on

I just got off the plane a couple of hours ago, only to find my bag which I checked in ripped open and soap all over my stuff. Apparently, the TSA felt it necessary to check my bag to see if it was something other than soap.

The first thing is this: EVERYONE has heard by now that liquids/gels cannot be brought on CARRY-ON bags. But what about checked-in bags? If I knew there checked-in bags would be checked like this over a bottle of soap, I never would have stolen it from the hotel! Please be consistent. Are these types of things done on a case-by-case thing, or is this done all the time. And if so, why don't we get an ad campaign like the one the TSA put on to warn us about carry-on luggage? PLEASE BE CONSISTENT!

Second thing: If you rip open a bag & then rip open a bottle of soap, DON'T PUT IT BACK IN THE BAG!!!!! IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE! I would rather lose a bottle of soap than ruin the rest of my stuff.

Submitted by Pastor Ray on

I don't understand why I can't bring in a SEALED bottle of water with me. It is frustrating because purchasing materials that I will need on a long flight are often ridiculously expensive inside the airport terminal. Sometimes I wonder if this is just a ploy to force travelers to purchase supplies at the overpriced stands in the airport. This has become especially tiresome now that airlines are forcing you to pay for food, some even drinks, on the flight as well as limiting the amount of luggage we can check in to one bag. I feel like the airline industry is one industry where consumers have no say and have to accept HORRIBLE customer service.

Also, couldn't a bomber just bring powder materials in their carry-on and mix the explosives with a liquid once on the airplane? I think that no matter what we do, or how much we restrict, those evil forces are always going to find a way around the laws! In the meantime, we are just make the millions and millions of good travelers more and more miserable.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Regarding liquids on commercial airliners:

I would like to know the dollar amount of all items collected/confiscated from travellers since this "rule" was put in place.

I would then like to know, of all the items collected/confiscated, the percentage of items that turned out to be dangerous explosives.

I believe this "rule" is on par with the man standing in the middle of Times Square in NYC with a banana stuck in his ear. When asked, "Why do you have a banana stuck in your ear?", he replies, "To keep away bears". When he is then told that there are no bears in Times Square, he replies, "See, it's working!".

TSA is the man with the banana in his ear.

I'm pretty sure 100% of the millions of dollars worth of items confiscated by TSA turned out to be harmless (i.e. exactly what there are supposed to be).

Submitted by Anonymous on

Please clear up the confusion! I've been told I don't have to put my tube of lipstick in the clear, quart baggie. Then I've been told I do. I don't want to risk losing a $20 tube of lipstick due to the whims of whatever baggage inspector I run across. Exactly what cosmetics CAN I carry? Nowhere can I find a complete list. Obviously this rule is here to stay, and I DO understand the reasoning behind it. I want to comply, but we need detailed rules on this. What about a powder compact? Armani makes a powder foundation that I bought because I am hoping it wouldn't have to go in the baggie. I'm taking a two week trip and it is very difficult, if not impossible, to put everything I need into a one quart plastic baggie.
Can anybody tell me what I can safely put in my makeup bag in my purse? Thanks.

Submitted by MyCatLulu- Becca on

Hi,

Thanks for opening the dialogue. I hope you here what many people have to say. I would like to know if you can do something about the cost of bottled water once you pass the security point. My last flight it cost over three dollars for a 12 oz bottle. Flight attends have so much work already they don't go around offering you more water. And the taste at my airport fountain is very chlorinated that it feels like I am drinking from the pool.

Please put this into consideration,
Becca

Submitted by Anonymous on

all cosmetics are allowed...but lip gloss mascaras face creams & liquid eyeliners should be pulled out of carry ons so that we do not have to check your bag...


i work for tsa phx and we have very freindly tso's!!!!1

Submitted by Anonymous on

While at the Atlanta airport about a year ago, I encountered the usual 'barking' about putting liquids in plastic bags. The TSA agent was basically telling people that if they didn't have a plastic bag, they'd have to go all the way back to buy one. I didn't have any liquids myself, but we had already missed our flight just standing in the line, which took an hour and a half just to get to the security machines. I thought that was a little unfair for those not traveling with someone old enough who could run back to get some. I've seen in many other airports where they are generous enough to provide you with a bag if you don't have one. Why not get a cheaper bulk purchase from Glad(r) and employ that practice at all checkpoints?

Submitted by Anonymous on

I've given some thought to the liquids policy (or lack thereof) and came to the conclusion that the threat they're attempting to 'protect' us against has nothing to do with binary explosives, making explosives on board and aircraft, but is instead an attempt at protecting the traveling public against binary chemical (think nerve gas) weapons.

That senerio is the only one that makes any sense to me as to why TSA continues in it's liquids policy. I seriously doubt that the next terrorist attack will have anything to do with with airlines and will instead be against chemical plants, nuclear power plants, crops (biological weapons), or some other unprotected high value targets.

Submitted by Anonymous on

...Wow. What a country we live in where people are lauded and encouraged to insult and talk down to those persons whose job it is to help attempt to protect their PRIVELEDGE (Flying is a priveledge, NOT a right) to fly. Shades of post Vietnam where veterans were ignored, spat upon, and cursed by the very people who gave of themselves whether or not they actually BELIEVED in the cause for which they fought. I am not going so far as to say the TSA is on par with a Vietnam vet in all aspects, but for the treatment the average one puts up with on account of having to follow his or her superior's orders, They share that much in common. In re: to a couple of comments above- Yes, breastmilk is, and should be allowed. No, the UK doesn't allow water (last time I flew from there they still outlawed ALL carryon period, nevermind liquids, lest we forget the UK was the impetus for this rule everyone now hates so much), It IS actually possible to mix liquid explosives under home conditions (Nevermind the actual compound HMX, just see any news report dealing with a meth-lab for combustible liquids veracity), NO, Hazmat items SHOULD be segregated and NOT thrown away (they are at the airport in which I work), and NO, per federal instruction (and under pain of firing), TSA employees do NOT keep the liquid items abandoned at the checkpoint (however they cannot and do not control the 'dumpster diving' that sometimes occurs with the janitorial and airline staff.) And finally, to the poster who lamented how badly the TSA has done in the last 8 years, I offer this: Check your research, this agency hasn't been around that long yet.

As far as the 'drunk with power' issue, I can only offer this, from my experiences flying, both as a veteran, TSA employee, and a civilian parent of multiple small children:

There are always options. YOUR attitude often affects theirs. You always have the right to find and talk to a supervisor or manager. You cannot expect them to recite to you the 'why' the rule verbatim, but they are mandated to give you just as much of an answer as they are legally allowed insofar as it does not interrupt the flow of passengers behind you. Inconsistencies abound, they do everywhere, it is to be expected. Have you ever been to a restaraunt and received the wrong order? Have you ever ordered something online and had it turn up at your door broken? Have you ever dealt with a CSR (customer service rep) at a retail agency who was 'less than polite?'. Sure you have. So have I. It happens. Same as it does in the Airport. While that is not a justification of behavior of that nature by far, it should serve to remind some people to step back out of their comfort zone and realize that just because Screener 'X' in ATL treated you badly on Monday, doesn't mean ALL screeners are this way. Many of us work daily to overcome that bad image and some of the public simply will not ALLOW you to be nice to them. I would offer anyone who has the chance to come fly through our airport down here in GPT in the state of MS if your plans bring you through this region. As a staff supervisor here, I pride myself on my team's consistency, accuracy, pleasantry, and dedication day in and day out. I will not defend the goings on in airports I do not work at (but have not truly witnessed inconsistencies when I flew off duty) but I will vouch for them here. I applaud both ends of this blog where a true discourse has gone on, and simply shake my head at those inflammatory and uninformed posts (from both sides,sometimes) that serve to do nothing but foster a negative attitude. Good day to you all.

-Proud STSO in GPT

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous
Anonymous said...

Sorry about that folks. Tooth powder is forbidden as being a liquid (it pours). I tried.

Wow! Now they are even re writting the rules of physics! Last I checked, powder would be a solid, but air is considered a liquid because of the week atomic bonding and lack of crystaline structure.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I work for TSA. When I'm at the checkpoint checking bags for liquids, pastes, gels, and aerosols, some passengers get upset when I tell them that some of the items are too big or they need a baggy for their items. They tell me that they were able to get through security with those objects from other airports, but they can't here. At the airport I work at, we follow everything to a T while others don't. I can understand for the bigger and busier airports, but that's no exception. Shouldn't all airports follow the rules to ensure passengers safety no matter what?

Submitted by Anonymous on

this is in response to travlr on march 29. i m a truck driver these same rules apply in carry hazmat. i can carry 50 barrels of 45 gallons of gas, and do not need to place a plackard on the side of the truck. but if i put 1 barrel of 50 gallons i must use a plackard. same crazy logic.

Submitted by Anonymous on

This is in response to the traveler on April 1 asking why TSA doesn't offer baggies to individuals at all airports. Some airports, like where I work, offer the baggies free of charge to the traveling public and booties for your feet as well. TSA is not involved with this in any way.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Why is it that there is never an answer to the issues raised concerning tossing "hazardous" items in a common bin next to passengers in line, challenging TSA to prove that liquids are, in fact, hazardous, and the other issues people have raised here?"

Good question. No one is saying that the liquids, in and of themselves, are dangerous. Not TSA. Not anyone. What IS dangerous is accessible property on the plane. The devices modern terrorists use are not pre-assembled ACME terrorist bomb kits. They are IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICES. The key word being IMPROVISED. Terrorists practice their tactics multiple times prior to actually carrying out any attack. They practice concealment and the assembly of dangerous devices. The reason we can't allow liquids is being spelled out in the trial of the plotters in the London incident:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article...

It's the same reason a gun can be declared and checked in as luggage but cannot be carried in the cabin. The accessible nature of the property is what causes problems and the whiny, spoiled, self-centered nature of many modern travelers is what makes lines so long. Modern Americans just can't imagine not being able to take everything they want wherever they want it.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I want to thank {I assume they are a TSA person] for the comment providing a reason why the liquids policy exists. So now I understand why no liquids can pass the security line but why allow liquids to be purchased then? If the goal is to prevent improvised bombs using bottles and typical liquids, why can we purchase them after we pass security? Removing them at the checkpoint serves no purpose.
I don't consider myself a whinny American traveler; I just would like to see the government ustilise effective and efficient solutions - not heavy-handed procedures that appear to be working.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Ok, a big inconsistency among government agencies here...

Why is it that the US Food and Drug Administration can deem a factory-sealed 3.5 oz product to be safe for the public? After all, according to the TSA, factory-sealed 3.5 oz products are potentially dangerous and are not permitted through security.

I don't get it! Both the FDA and TSA are responsible for public safety, but there appears to be a massive discrepancy as to the usefulness of a factory seal.

Submitted by Anonymous on

With regard to a couple of issues, theres a quite simple solution to passinb beverages through the screening areas.
simply put, require resealable containers, no unresealable cans for obvious spillage reasone. Limit beverage containers to the common plastic bottles many drinks come in now, and before allowing it to pass into the sterile area, require the passanger to drink from the bottle in the presense of a TSA agent.
I seriously doubt anyone would willingly drink from a bottle containing anything dangerous and this procedure would take no more time than the time taken dealing with arguements regarding procedures.
As a note, prior to the liquids ban, i had this happen several times when boarding aircraft. a simple "sir or ma'am i need to see you take a drink of that beverage."
Big problem solved.

Second issue, regarding people with artificial joint transplants, Regardless of the fact most medical institutions provide a medical card indicating an aratificial joint is present, I've personally seen and heard TSA comment "it could be a forged document"
Now i fully realize its necessary to identify the source when a metal detector alarms, but FAA should find a way to provide an ID card for those qualified indicating joint replacements. While still necessary to identify the alarm source, it would at least document from the juristicting authority such an implant is present.
The liklihood of this document then being forged would be no greater than the danger of other forged Identification documents.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"I am a small, caucasian woman, 5' about 90 lbs. Do I really look like I would do something terroristic? I thought not. How 'bout some profiling here?"

Unreal, more evidence that you can't please everyone! Besides the fact that profiling doesn't work, (Did Tim McVeigh "look" like a terrorist?) now we have those who want "reverse" profiling? So, essentially, you don't "look" like a terrorist, so you should be left alone with your oversized liquid, but a person of non-caucasian heritage should automatically give up theirs? Yeah right! Maybe the ACLU will go for it, why don't you bring it up to them? I'm sure they will give your logic the attention it deserves!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

What in the world do you people think Im going to put into my shampoo that could possible harm anyone?

Submitted by Anonymous on

First, I must say that TSA workers (TSO's?) have gotten much more polite where I fly, mainly Spokane, Washington. The lines move along quickly, there are plenty of bins to put your stuff in, I have been non-judgementally given a free zip lock bag,they are generally mostly polite (the TSO's, not the bins), and I only have to show my ID one time.

There, that's out of the way, now for the gripe. IF my tube of toothpaste has only about 2 oz. left of its original 6 oz, why is it not allowed (the TSO did make an exception, but to be lectured by a slightly pompous 20-something is not my idea of a good time for your average 50 year old). I'm not exactly going to be able to unroll the tube and thereby create more explosive toothpaste or use the tube to mix my IED when I could just as easily use the plastic glass that my ginger ale was served in. Surely it is the amount of liquid or paste or powder that matters.

Now could we move on to whether knitting needles are going to be uniformly allowed?

Submitted by Anonymous on
There, that's out of the way, now for the gripe. IF my tube of toothpaste has only about 2 oz. left of its original 6 oz, why is it not allowed (the TSO did make an exception, but to be lectured by a slightly pompous 20-something is not my idea of a good time for your average 50 year old).

Go to TSA's web site. See which measurement they use to determine fly/no fly. It is volume. Now see how the toothpaste(stick deodorant) mfgs sell their products. Hint, it isn't volume, but by weight. Go ahead, I'll still be here when you get back. So how do the TSOs verify the volume of a container sold by weight? Have you ever seen a graduated cylinder at any TSA checking point? Nope, to them volume = mass. I'm glad that they have no medical doctors working for them.
Submitted by Anonymous on

Ok, so here it is... plain and simple. Any container of ANYTHING that can pour, spread, squeez or spary is considered a liquid. If the container is marked over 3.4oz, REGARDLESS OF MASS OR VOLUME, it can not be brought through the checkpoint. Exceptions are made for baby formula, medications, etc. If the container is marked 6oz, but is only half full; doesn't matter! It is marked over 3.4oz and can not go through. Drinks can not be brought through. Why? Guess what; milk, water, juices are all liquids and their containers are probably marked over 3.4oz. We don't know what is in the container, so we can't let it through. You can buy drinks after you have passed through security because any liquid on the inside is screened and cleared as a non threat. I think I've covered just about everything. And for anyone that want's to argue about the rule, or doesn't understand why you can't bring your favorite hair gel or you energy drink... remember back to Aug. 10, 2006; here's the story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4778575.stm

Just remember this situation next time a TSO askes you to remove your liquids from your bag. After all, we could resort back to the NO LIQUIDS at all rule again.

-BOS TSO

Submitted by Anonymous on

I hope all you that think that the liquid threat is all hype and bs will check out TSAs website today and listen to all the reports from the BBC about the trial of the UK bombers and the plot to blow up airplanes bound for North America. This was and is a viable plot and if liquids were allowed without testing every single oversized bottle for every type of explosives imaginable (not feasible) we cannot be sure that a liquid is not an explosive component to a bomb.

Those of you that think the 311 rule should be done away with really need to do some more research because you are very thoroughly rebutted by the evidence presented at the trial of the bombers.

Submitted by Anonymous on
I hope all you that think that the liquid threat is all hype and bs will check out TSAs website today and listen to all the reports from the BBC about the trial of the UK bombers and the plot to blow up airplanes bound for North America.

So what about the clouds of nasty smelling fumes? How many hours would it take to make that stuff on board the aircraft? How many pounds of ice and salt would be needed? It is still very unlikely that the terrorist goons would have either the access or the resources to do this. I put this one down as reacting to the threat of someone constructing a dye laser from compact mirrors, jello, strobes from cameras and then using the laser to burn a hole through a cockpit door. A Hollywood plot gone awry when the terrorists (muslims) attempted it.

Pages