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 This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.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.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous on

A lot of people are asking why 3.4oz and why not 4oz or 5oz. If you still remeber your conversion unit, 3.4oz is an equivalent of 100 ml.

Submitted by Aimee on

Anonymous said, "A lot of people are asking why 3.4oz and why not 4oz or 5oz. If you still remeber your conversion unit, 3.4oz is an equivalent of 100 ml.

May 16, 2008 1:22 PM"

Yes, but do the TSA screeners remember their conversion units, or are they just going by the straight 3 oz rule found elsewhere on the website? And are unlabeled containers allowed?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Jim Huggins said...
Anonymous writes:

i understand what you mean about professionalism. you are very right. but if you have flown for 7 years why are you complaining about being told to keep your boarding pass in your hands ??? seems like you are that passenger who manages to do everything wrong when in the front of the line.

Because while I'm holding my boarding pass in my hand, I also have to take off my shoes, take my laptop out of its case, take my quart-sized bag with liquids out of my carry-on, get all of those items into bins to go through the x-ray machine (along with my carry-ons, of course), and then push them onto the conveyor belt at the appropriate moment. Since I only have two hands, I do occasionally have to put down my boarding pass in order to execute those actions.

Which means that if an overzealous TSO happens to look at me at the exact moment when I've put down my boarding pass in order to untie my shoes, I could get yelled at ... even though I know the rules, and am doing my best to comply.

Disclaimer: I've never had this happen to me, personally ... but I know others here have.

May 7, 2008 9:12 PM

THATS PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU MAKE UP THE 1 OUT OF 10 PEOPLE WHO DO KNOW THE RULES WHEN FLYING THROUGH THAT CHECKPOINT. NO TSO I KNOW HAS ANY PSYCHIC CAPABILITIES SO THEY DONT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND FIRST TIME FLYER OR INTERNATIONAL FLYER WHO MAY NOT KNOW THE RULES. SORRY YOU HAVE TO BE SUBJECTED TO IT.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Ceronomus said...
Let's forget about things like shoes coming off at one airport and not another and talk about a MAJOR inconsistency.

Why are there six year old children, SKY MARSHALS, and heads of State such as NELSON MANDELA, on the do not fly list?

We're looking for terrorists right? We're trying to catch terrorists. Using a list of names is bound to cause inconsistencies and problems since it is so easy to get a fake ID in the first place.

So, while the TSA and the Department of Homeland Security prevent Sky Marshals from boarding the flights that they are to protect (because their name is similar to someone on the watch list), a person ON the watch list only needs a fake ID to breeze onto a plane.

THAT is inconsistent and that needs to be addressed. This "super secret" watch list that is growing exponentially will soon make it impossible for anyone to fly. Heck, a friend of mine was cavity searched while they asked him questions about the Russian mob.

So how about we go back to things that actually work? Prevention, WELL TRAINED screeners, and a little thing called common sense. Looking for a terrorist by name isn't going to accomplish much, they'll just keep using aliases while non-terrorists get refused access to their planes and, apparently, cavity searched.

May 6, 2008 2:42 PM

I HAVE NEVER WITNESSED ANYONE FROM TSA STANDING AT A GATE TELLING ANYONE THEY CANT BOARD A PLANE. BUT THEN AGAIN TO SOME PASSENGERS TSA=CUSTODIANS. TSA=AIRPORT POLICE AND SECURITY. TSA=AIRLINE EMPLOYEES.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
To anonymous who posted on May 4: "wouldnt recommending passengers not to wear hooded sweatshirts result in tsa doing too much ??"

If the TSA is selecting persons in sweatshirts for additional screening, we should be warned about this beforehand, so we can avoid being singled out for this reason.

Of course, I totally agree that selecting a person for addition screening based on the fact that this person is wearing a hood, or the tightness of their clothes, is ridiculous in the first place.

May 7, 2008 10:48 AM

ridiculous ??? yea so is the person seated next to you who happened to get by with a carbon knife that wont set off the metal detector and was able to get through because his big sweatshirt prevented tsa from seein anything unusual. then what are you gonna do? leave? no because the airplane is 30,000 ft in the air. exit the row ? no because he has the aisle seat so if he/she happens to pull out that carbon knife which was not detected because of the bulk in his hooded sweatshirt then you think about your comments. no justification at all.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
for one.. not EVERY employee has to go through security. there are other access points in the airport for employees who do not need to go through security to report to work. THUS the person got caught. so why the sarcasm ??

Not sarcasm, the person with the weapon had passed a checkpoint controlled by contract security. TSA's supervision of the contract security was inadequate to ensure that no contraband made its way to the secured area. The person was on the aircraft ramp area, so I suspect this is a controlled area.

OK ONCE AGAIN BECAUSE IM STARTING TO BECOME ANNOYED. AIRPORT.. ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME ?? AIRPORT EMPLOYEES "DO NOT" HAVE TO GO THROUGH CHECKPOINTS. THERE ARE DOORS WITH ID SWIPES THAT THEY USE TO GO TO WORK. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CHECKPOINT BUT NOW TSA NOT ONLY CHECKS AIRPORT EMPLOYEES BUT THEY ARE ALSO CHECKING PLANES BEFORE FLIGHT CREW AND PASSENGERS BOARD. CONTRACT SECURITY ?? AIRPORT EMPLOYEES SWIPE THEIR ID TO GAIN ACCESS INTO THAT AREA. WHAT SECURITY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ?? YOU HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY MISINFORMED.

Had this person brought a bomb on he could have placed it on an aircraft or into a passengers checked baggage after it had been cleared.

OK IF AN EMPLOYEE SO HAPPENS TO DO THAT THEN WHAT CAN I SAY ? DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY EMPLOYEES WORK AT AN AIRPORT ??? DO YOU REALIZE THAT THEY ALL COME TO WORK AT THE SAME TIME YOU FLY ? SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY WANNA COME TO WORK AND TSA HAS TO SCREEN THEM ? HMMM LETS SEE. PRIORITY IN LINE WHICH MEANS EVERY...LAST....ONE....CAN..AND WILL...JUMP IN FRONT OF YOU. so wave goodbye to your flight if you are running late. 2ndly if an employee were to do that. then thats the credibility of the airline for hiring that person. has nothing to do with tsa.

Additionally, it proves the point that access to the ramp areas is not secure and is the most likely means of introducing contraband.

its not secure for a passenger. its secure for employees because they are sworn in to protect the credibility of the airport so if they do it then jail time or fine. all you can do is hope you hired an honest person. if you..a passenger EVEN THOUGHT you could gain access to the ramp then i would love to see you make headline news.

TSA is busy confiscating water and such and has a severe security whole that remains unplugged.

2ndly airport has 2 different airport police as well as different airport security who patrols the boundaries nonstop. if an employee happens to bring something to work. tsa cant stop it as we deal moreso with the flying public.

Hey, if your ok with that then so am I. I'm willing to take my chances that the next attack will not be via aviation.

May 5, 2008 10:40 AM

IF THE NEXT ATTACK ISNT WITH AVIATION THEN THATS NOT MY CONCERN AS I COULDNT DO ANYTHING TO PREVENT IT

May 7, 2008 12:41 PM

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
re:OK ONCE AGAIN BECAUSE IM STARTING TO BECOME ANNOYED. AIRPORT.. ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME ??

.........................

I don't give a Rats Rearend if your getting annoyed.

Airport..Are you following me.

A person had a weapon on the ramp area of a supposedly secure area.

TSA is tasked to make sure that Civil Aviation is safe.

TSA failed, plan and simple.

If your not checking everyone entering the operations area then there is no reason to check anyone.

TSA=Theater

Not Security!

May 7, 2008 4:47 PM

YOU GOTTA LOVE THE PEOPLE WHO TALK FOR NO APPARENT REASON. AIRPORT...ARE YOU HEARING "ME"?!

HAS MANY DIFFERENT SECURITY/POLICE.

TSA. 2 OR EVEN MORE DIFFERENT SECURITY PATROL OFFICERS AND...2 AIRPORT POLICE.

TSA DEALS WITH THE FLYING PUBLIC SO IF AN EMPLOYEE WERE TO SNEAK SOMEONE ON THE PLANE. HOW CAN TSA FAIL? ITS ON THAT AIRLINE FOR HIRING THAT EMPLOYEE.

2ND THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO PATROL THAT AREA. PASSENGERS LIKE YOU SWEAR UP AND DOWN THAT TSA RUNS THE AIRPORT AND YOU ARE SO FAR FROM THE TRUTH

Submitted by Anonymous on

Carbon Freeze said...
Probably the best side-effect of the TSA's ramp-up following 9/11 was the sudden change from terse, unhelpful, discourteous, unknowledgeable agents to human, effective, courteous, knowledgeable ones. I found this remarkable at the time, but since then the pendulum has slowly and inconsistently drifted back in the other direction. Are we simply no longer engaging in the excellent training program that those initial post-9/11 employees obviously undertook? Or is it rather that we are no longer willing to offer the salaries that we did immediately after 9/11?
In either case, we travelers deserve to be treated as humans, and if the only way to do that is to spend more on salaries and/or training, I say do it.
Even better: Offer, at the cost of $1, a security line where the traveler is guaranteed to be served by one of these better-trained employees. Compared to $300 and $400 airfares, it'll feel like a drop in the bucket!

May 14, 2008 9:46 AM

I GUARANTEE IN THAT VERY SAME LINE YOU WOULD FIND A REASON TO TOTALLY IGNORE EVERY SINGLE RULE LIKE..FORGET YOUR BOARDING PASS, KEEP YOUR SHOES ON, FORGET TO TAKE YA PHONE OUT YOUR POCKET EVEN THOUGH YOU KNOW YOU ARE ABOUT TO GO THROUGH A METAL DETECTOR. so such a line would be a disaster

Submitted by Anonymous on

alexander said...
I have two things, and for at least the first comment, I would like a responce.
My first comment is that very recently, my son was flying from miami to pittsburgh with his grandfather. First of all, they were both asked to show ID, in SPANISH. It is a good thing that my son spoke fluent spanish, because the tso did not speak english, and my father wouldn't have known what to do. My son is only 13, and he was asked for ID, and he had to correct 3 tso's (remember, they only spoke spanish) and was subject to additional screening because he didn't have an id on him. You should make shure the rule that anyone younger than 18 doesn't need an id is enforced, and that an international airport inside the U.S. should have some ENGLISH speaking tso's.

secondly, an easy to impliment suggestion. Many people would like more time before security to be able to take off their shoes, take things out of their bags, or to do other things. My other son has braces that he uses to help him walk, and they are difficult to take off, and I would also like this more room. I know that in many airports lengthing the checkpoint is not feasable, but what you could do is in one or two lines, across from the tables leading up to the x-rays, have some chairs that could be used. This would provide the same effect as lengthening the area before the x-rays, but in a more compact version.

May 19, 2008 2:33 PM

YOU DO HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO TAKE OFF YOUR SHOES ETC. JUST GET OUT OF LINE AS YOU HAVE PASSENGERS BEHIND YOU WHO MAY BE LATE FOR A FLIGHT OR IN MORE OF A RUSH THAN HAVE TO WAIT. SO IF YOU WANT MORE TIME SIMPLY STEP OUT OF LINE.

Submitted by Jim Huggins on

The all-caps Anonymous writes:

THATS PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU MAKE UP THE 1 OUT OF 10 PEOPLE WHO DO KNOW THE RULES WHEN FLYING THROUGH THAT CHECKPOINT. NO TSO I KNOW HAS ANY PSYCHIC CAPABILITIES SO THEY DONT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND FIRST TIME FLYER OR INTERNATIONAL FLYER WHO MAY NOT KNOW THE RULES. SORRY YOU HAVE TO BE SUBJECTED TO IT.

But isn't there a better way? Why do you have to presume that I don't know the rules until I demonstrate that I do? How about presuming that I do know the rules until I demonstrate that I don't?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
To anonymous who posted on May 4: "wouldnt recommending passengers not to wear hooded sweatshirts result in tsa doing too much ??"

If the TSA is selecting persons in sweatshirts for additional screening, we should be warned about this beforehand, so we can avoid being singled out for this reason.

Of course, I totally agree that selecting a person for addition screening based on the fact that this person is wearing a hood, or the tightness of their clothes, is ridiculous in the first place.

May 7, 2008 10:48 AM

ridiculous ?? hmmm i PERSONALLY caught a guy with a cocaine pipe and cocaine in his eye contact solution because he chose to wear a vest (which is an outer garment). i have also witness first hand a guy trying to smuggle thousands of dollars in his loose fitting clothes which was more than the allowable limit. you never know what someone is hiding in their clothes. i know your perception is tsa is supposed to stop bombs and such but im afraid its more to it than that. there are plenty of other things that cannot go through the checkpoint as well as things that passengers cannot take or would receive a huge fine for and or jail time if caught with it. such as drugs and more than the allowable limit of cash.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Jim Huggins said...
The all-caps Anonymous writes:

THATS PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU MAKE UP THE 1 OUT OF 10 PEOPLE WHO DO KNOW THE RULES WHEN FLYING THROUGH THAT CHECKPOINT. NO TSO I KNOW HAS ANY PSYCHIC CAPABILITIES SO THEY DONT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND FIRST TIME FLYER OR INTERNATIONAL FLYER WHO MAY NOT KNOW THE RULES. SORRY YOU HAVE TO BE SUBJECTED TO IT.

But isn't there a better way? Why do you have to presume that I don't know the rules until I demonstrate that I do? How about presuming that I do know the rules until I demonstrate that I don't?

May 22, 2008 4:18 PM

is there a better way of telling someone who may not know the rules of flying to keep their boarding pass while they are comingled in a line with people who do know how to keep their boarding passes in their hand BEFORE they send it through the xray which causes tsa to stop the flow of the line as well as the xray operator from running the belt because we have to recover that boarding pass. please tell me any other sensible way of doing it other than making a loud announcement so they EVERYONE can keep their tickets out.

even working at the airport there are times where i have to present my id and i slap myself on the forehead because i just put it on the belt by accident. i have had experienced passengers forget so the loud announcement is probably the only way.

Submitted by Jim Huggins on
please tell me any other sensible way of doing it other than making a loud announcement so they EVERYONE can keep their tickets out.

It's all about attitude. "Loud" and "rude" don't have to be synonymous.

Yesterday I passed through TSA security at DTW (5/27, around 10:00am). As I finished getting my stuff onto the conveyer and was waiting for my turn, the TSO beyond the X-ray machine made a general reminder announcement ... the usual stuff (coats off, big electronics in bins, etc.). His voice was certainly raised above conversational level, in order to be heard above the crowd. But his tone was courteous & respectful; it was clear that his intent was to remind, not to scold. (It was also clear that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular.)
Submitted by Anonymous on

i have also witness first hand a guy trying to smuggle thousands of dollars in his loose fitting clothes which was more than the allowable limit.

May 27, 2008 6:26 AM

I am confused regarding this statement. Is there a limit on the amount of money that a person can carry through the checkpoint?

Submitted by Anonymous on

There are rules about how much cash you can take when traveling internationally. But individual states have different rules regarding this. You can be arrested for driving with too much cash: http://blogs.automotive.com/1000395/miscellaneous/driving-with-too-much-...
I'm pretty sure the same goes for flying with a very large sum of cash. The TSA doesn't arrest anyone but we have to report large amounts of cash to law enforcement.

Submitted by Anonymous on

why is it that people gripe at the screeners who are just doing their jobs and not at the management and admninstrators who make the TSO's implement these rules.im pretty sure they're like anyone else who has a job, if they dont follow the rules, they get fired.....just saying...

Submitted by Anonymous on

I just read through most of the posts on liquids and I just have to put in my two cents worth. I had the craziest (to me) thing happen today while flying out of Charlottesville, VA. One of the TSA people rummaged through my carry on luggage for my makeup bag (which I’ve carried on probably 50 fights since the liquids ban began and took out my “liquid” mascara and a few other very small tubes of cosmetics and made me put them in with my shampoo and other liquids in the quart size plastic bag I carry with all of those things in it.
Is liquid mascara is really a threat to national security? Why is that even on the list? Of course then she told me I’d need to downsize the overall quantity of things I take with me traveling so I could make all that stuff fit in next time. I was so mad. Why is it that I’ve never been stopped all of the other 49 times I gone through security for breeching security with mascara or those other things?
What about the time I went through security (actually more than once because I forgot I had it in my camera gear) with my Leather Man tool, complete with several knives and security missed that but decided to take my hair gel instead and expensive face lotion instead.
Another complaint I have about the list is that is unfairly penalizes women and children. Take a look at the list of forbidden liquids below and see how many of them apply almost strictly to women and children.

Applies to passengers of all genders but women or more likely to use most/more of them.
Aerosol spray bottles and cans, hair styling gels and spray of all kinds including aerosol, Neosporin or first-aid creams and ointments, lip gels such as Carmex or Blistex, topical or rash creams and ointments, suntan lotions, moisturizers, etc., bug and mosquito sprays and repellents, deodorants made of gel or aerosol, eye drops, hair styling gels and spray of all kinds including aerosol, liquid sanitizers, liquid soaps, mouthwash, non-prescription liquid or gel medicines like cough syrup and gel cap type pills, saline solution, shampoos and conditioners, and toothpaste.

Applies to women only in most cases.
Bubble bath balls, bath oils or moisturizers, hair straightener or detangler, liquid lip glosses or other liquids for lips, liquid foundations, liquid, gel or spray perfumes and colognes, liquid soaps, liquid mascara, make up removers or facial cleansers, personal lubricants, and nail polish and removers.

What is the real function of the TSA anyway? This system is clearly flawed! It is all smoke and mirrors and does little to really protect us.

Submitted by Anonymous on

The whole "liquid" thing is a joke. I traveled for years with a 3.4 oz bottle (shampoo). Suddenly I went through a TSA checkpoint and this time that extra four tenths of an ounce was a threat to national security. He could have opened the bottle. He could have checked the ID and seen it was a Naval Officer with it. But no, four tenths of an ounce was potentially deadly.

When the whole thing started, it became clear it would be a big bureaucracy. Bureaucracies aren't worried about results, but about procedures and processes established to cover the back sides of those heading up the bureaucracy. So that's what we've got - TSA=CYA and nothing more.

Submitted by Anonymous on

To Anonymous 10:42PM:

The screeners at Charlottesville don't have a whole lot to do (few flights out each day), so they get bored and make up things to do -- like going through your makeup bag.

One time I was leaving from the Charlottesville airport, and the screener pawed through everything until she finally found my tiny, fold-up sewing scissors with the .75 inch blades. Heck, they only cost $1.49, but rather than "voluntarily" give them up, I took them back out to the car.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
I just read through most of the posts on liquids and I just have to put in my two cents worth. I had the craziest (to me) thing happen today while flying out of Charlottesville, VA. One of the TSA people rummaged through my carry on luggage for my makeup bag (which I’ve carried on probably 50 fights since the liquids ban began and took out my “liquid” mascara and a few other very small tubes of cosmetics and made me put them in with my shampoo and other liquids in the quart size plastic bag I carry with all of those things in it.
Is liquid mascara is really a threat to national security? Why is that even on the list? Of course then she told me I’d need to downsize the overall quantity of things I take with me traveling so I could make all that stuff fit in next time. I was so mad. Why is it that I’ve never been stopped all of the other 49 times I gone through security for breeching security with mascara or those other things?
What about the time I went through security (actually more than once because I forgot I had it in my camera gear) with my Leather Man tool, complete with several knives and security missed that but decided to take my hair gel instead and expensive face lotion instead.
Another complaint I have about the list is that is unfairly penalizes women and children. Take a look at the list of forbidden liquids below and see how many of them apply almost strictly to women and children.

Applies to passengers of all genders but women or more likely to use most/more of them.
Aerosol spray bottles and cans, hair styling gels and spray of all kinds including aerosol, Neosporin or first-aid creams and ointments, lip gels such as Carmex or Blistex, topical or rash creams and ointments, suntan lotions, moisturizers, etc., bug and mosquito sprays and repellents, deodorants made of gel or aerosol, eye drops, hair styling gels and spray of all kinds including aerosol, liquid sanitizers, liquid soaps, mouthwash, non-prescription liquid or gel medicines like cough syrup and gel cap type pills, saline solution, shampoos and conditioners, and toothpaste.

Applies to women only in most cases.
Bubble bath balls, bath oils or moisturizers, hair straightener or detangler, liquid lip glosses or other liquids for lips, liquid foundations, liquid, gel or spray perfumes and colognes, liquid soaps, liquid mascara, make up removers or facial cleansers, personal lubricants, and nail polish and removers.

What is the real function of the TSA anyway? This system is clearly flawed! It is all smoke and mirrors and does little to really protect us.

ok do you really need bubble bath balls on your carry on ???

Submitted by Anonymous on

Neelie, you say you are a Jewish grandmother and you hardly fit the profile of a terrorist. Please tell me what a terrorist looks like?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Someone posted that they are a small, caucasian woman, 5' about 90 lbs. Do I really look like I would do something terroristic. Well please tell me what a terrorists looks like again?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Yesterday, June 4, 2008, my wife and two daughters (14, 12) returned from vacation in Orlando, Florida. They flew on NW from Orlando to Omaha departing around 11:30 AM. They processed security through the checkpoint handling gates 40-50. My 12 y/o inadvertently carried a personal sports bottle filled with water in her carry-on. The bottle was discovered upon screening. Instead of being allowed to quickly drink the water, she was directed/commanded to immediately leave the screening area, discard the water, and then re-enter the security processing line. This was not only unreasonable, but it also placed my child at risk. Consider that my wife and other daughter were also undergoing the screening process, and at the moment of the incident, my wife's belongings were being inspected. She could not depart the line to accompany my child. Instead, she had to move through the screening area and wait, without a clear view of my youngest child. This action, in my opinion, placed my child at risk. She could have gotten lost, could have been abducted, or could have been denied entry because she's only 12 and didn't 1) have identification and 2) was no longer accompanied by a parent. To make matters worse, the TSA Screeners were extremely rude, rigid in their attitude, and completely aloof to the alarm they caused my wife at the prospect of sending our youngest child alone through a very busy airport. She could have simply drank the water. As a federal employee involved myself in homeland security efforts, this is an absolute disgrace and makes all of us look bad. The treatment my family experienced yesterday runs afoul of each and every tenet the TSA Service Commitment illustrated on your website. In this case, TSA failed to strike a balance between reasonable security efforts and courtesy to fellow Americans.

James F.
Sioux Falls, SD

Submitted by Anonymous on

What I don´t understand about the liquid rule is the need for a zip lock bag. Limiting amounts can have some sort of strange justification and a transparent bag allows contents to be seen, but why a zip lock??? Have zip lock bags been shown to stop explosions? Wouldn´t it be better not to use a zip lock so particle detectors had a higher chance of picking traces up?

Submitted by Anonymous on

would anyone know this, or do you know where i have to email or call? i will be traveling internationally and would like to take unopened chocalate packages (4oz bars)(cadbury brand; dark, milk, and chocolate with almonds and raisins etc.). i will be taking these choclates as gifts to my friends and for myself. there's about 30 chocolate bars. can i put them in my purse or hand luggage. does the liquid restriction apply w chocolate? i called delta airlines, they were unsure.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Dear anonymous,

This blog has posted that chocolates are not liquids, although tooth powder is. It is a strange twist on the laws of Physics and Chemistry, but works for you. Of course, that does not matter if the officer at the airport you board decides to have up his/her own rules...

Submitted by Anonymous on

For the commenter with the question about the plastic bag, I wondered the same thing. And why a quart size bag? Isn't a gallon size bag going to do the same thing and hold all the liquid containers?

I asked a friend of mine who knows something about terrorists & security and he told me that many volitile conpounds (the kinds they are trying to keep off the panes with the liquids rule) will cause gasous emissions if enclosed in a small bag. In other words, if you put even an ounce or two of one of the liquids in a quart size bag, it will be noticable to the TSA folks who look at these bags. It is apparently anopther way to tell if the liquid you are bring in is "safe" - normal drinks and tioletries do not give off these kinds of gases.

Not sure if this is true, but it sounds pretty valid to me. And it actually explains something the TSA folks do with a real reason. I'm willing to buy it.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Just got back from an international flight. Like many of the bloggers on this page I appreciate being able to drink water on a flight, especially a long one, and the airlines do not usually serve water for an hour to two hours into the flight.

I bought a bottle of water past security, at a shop 50 feet from the gate at the inflated airport prices, and even though it was unopened and sealed, it was still taken right at boarding. This is absurdity.

Submitted by Anonymous on

On a recent episode of FutureWeapons, they demonstrated a new kind of liquid-scanning device by Optosecurity. This device is able to identify liquids, even when sealed in containers.

If the TSA decides to deploy these devices at airports, will that eliminate the need for the 3-1-1 rule? After all, if you can positively identify the contents of a container as harmless, then there is no longer a need to limit the quantities.

Submitted by Katy on

The TSA rules lack common sense. They appear to be for the sole purpose of creating the illusion of security. I used to fly a lot, but now fly only when another form of transportation isn't available.

The TSA needs to explain itself and stop treating each person have the unfortunate luck of traveling by air like they are the enemy. We are not and deserve to be treated with respect.

Submitted by Peter Williams on

The initial, total ban, on all liquids was horrible. Travel-size liquids are safe to bring through security checkpoints or at least beverages and other items purchased on some secure real estate like a a special area of the terminal after the check point in clearly marked containers.

Submitted by Portal on

And yet the blog authors still fail to address the scientific impossibility of their rule. These comments are merely collecting complaints, and are not action items.

Submitted by Moosquito on

I understand the purpose of the ban, and I know that tsa is trying their best. It is sad to know that their best is limited by their budget. I feel safer now than before but it still has a long way to go.

Submitted by Anonymous on

OK.... lets do it like this.. lets say.... in your city or state peop;ple are allowed to wear guns on their hips... follow me ? and suddenly there have been stories or gunshots being fired..

will you impose a ban on guns at that point or would you wait until someone gets shot or killed to put a halt to people wearing firearms in their hips?

whether or not the public or private has proof whether or not the europe plot would be successful or not... they tried it... so the usa is trying not to have it happen here. thats clear enough. lets not wait until terrorists prove whether or not that liquid plot would work. why not stop it all together ? because im willing to bet that after the europe plot story fades.. if usa allowed liquids and a plain as well as hundreds of victims are blown to pieces the public would be on tsa's back askin why is tsa allowing liquids when they heard about the europe plot. and tsa is stupid for not taking head from the europe plot.

i know and all of you who blog here know it. i dare anyone to say what im saying is false..

Submitted by Sacha on

"If TSA is going to assume the right to commit forcible theft in the name of national security, it should at least treat liquids it steals from passengers as if they are a threat. When you're just throwing them away, instead of treating them as a threat, you demonstrate that you don't really believe that they are a threat."

Found this comment in the blog from January, and thought it was simply the best statement and needed to be repeated.

This rule has become more unreasonable since the airlines are now charging to check a bag. I used to just check anything that didn't comply, that isn't an option for me now. I am not a wealthy person, I live in the country during these hard economic times just like everyone else, and I'll be damned if I will pay over- inflated airfare rates plus pay them to carrying my bag, and end up paying to replace a tube of lipgloss because some undertrained TSA agent thinks that I am possibly MacGyver and can build an atomic weapon with toothpaste, shampoo and a stick of deoderant.

I am so sad to see that common sense has been tossed out the window. I understand that we need to be vigilant and protect ourselves, but when did some government official decided that mascara is possibly dangerous. BTW, don't you think potential terrorist have by now figured out how to bypass this idiotic rule. I am sure the real danger is passing right by me at security while I try to shove one more item into my little quart size baggie.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Stop stealing my drinks!

I haven't flown in awhile and neglected to drink my Odwalla smoothie prior to the big security scan. A TSA guy took it from me. He let go through the 6 juice boxes I had for my kids. Is 24 ounces in individually wrapped 4 ounce containers really safer than one 12 oz bottle?

The TSA liquids policy is not security, it is security theater - a drama enacted at great cost to make the traveling audience feel better.

I don't feel better. The net result is that I look at all safety and security requests made by anyone related to air travel with disdain. When the pilot asks me to turn off my cell phone, I keep right on texting assuming it is as non-sensical as the TSA liquids policy.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I took a day trip from Oahu to Kauai and bought a jar of kukui nut cream while on Kauai. I used a bit of it on my sunburn that day and then it was thrown out by the TSA person when I tried to carry it on my flight back to Oahu. $12.50 down the drain...totally ridiculous. They also threw out a half empty 8 oz bottle of aloe gel that I was able to bring on the flight from Oahu to Kauai because I totally forgot I wasn't supposed to bring it on the plane and had it in my handbag.

Submitted by Anonymous on
Point 1 - Taking Bottled Water on the plane. Folks get green. Purchase a reusable water bottle. Take it empty through screening and fill it up at the water fountain after you get through. You are also helping the environment by not having all those plastic bottles in the land fill. These are no problem at security.
Point 2 - TSA Screener Inconsistancy with gells. This is probably my biggest complaint. One screener says deodorant and lipstick don't need to be in the 3-1-1 bag, the next one does. I love the comment someone made of "POURS…SPREADS…SQUEEZES..or..SPRAYS" as a guide, I just wish screeners would apply them consistantly. Liquids & Sprays are not a problem, it's the gels/paste and at what point a squeezable gell/paste is considered a solid. Hey TSA why not give us some written guidelines on your pages - is that "solid" deodorant a gell or a solid, how about the lipstick and chapstick.
Submitted by Anonymous on

Travelled to Chicago from Orlando airport with my wife. She has a back injury that requires medication. Under the medical liquids guidelines, we took a small amount of water (2 small bottles) and a can of juice so she could have it handy to take her meds. Also, the meds have a side effect of dehydrating. We declared the liquids and cruised thru security without anyone batting an eye. Flash forward to O'Hare on the way back. 1 1/2 bottles of water and a can of juice. First told we absolutely cannot take thru. I pulled out a printout of the TSA web guidelines, got the okay for 1 bottle of water. Wife was GRILLED about what her medical condition was, why she needed these items, etc. Asked for supervisor to explain why okay in Orlando but not Chicago. Asked what the allowed amount was. He said he couldn't tell us because the guidelines are "Secret"!! Well I guess we know the "secret" amount in Chicago...500ml. In Orlando...1500ml. No consistency!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

I have seen several comments from apparent screeners that they go by the label on the bottle.

Does that mean a 1L (34 Oz.) bottle will sail through if it is simply re-labeled?

In Canada they restrict the container size, not the actual amount of liquid. Why is a 1L bottle not okay, but a 1L (1 quart) baggie is?

Submitted by Anonymous on

I wonder if I can take 3 or 4 dozen tamales home with me in my carry on, any one know?

Submitted by Bay Area DUI Guy on

What kind of changes can we expect now that that one crack pot set his leg on fire trying to cook something up while landing at the Detroit airport?

Submitted by Frances on

Well i have to make an update about liquids covering about 70% of the earth. With the current conditions that are affecting the climate change, the amount of water that cover the Earth is definitely on the rise until we do something about it. Anyways, back to liquid, Liquid itself is a general term. Categorizing it together with hazardous materials is definitely debatable. You may say that if you add a certain amount of substance X to substance Y will give you a bomb. the thing is not many of us know what are the compositions that adds up that turn into a bomb. Even if someone has the know ledge to use different substances to make a hazardous material, what are the chances that he/she is successful in making one. Not very likely I guess. Well, at least this is from my optimistic point of view.

Submitted by Anonymous on

i just want to take my makeup!!! i wear a lot of makeup and i have a lot of makeup i just wanna take it with me on the plane and my makeup brushes!!!
its just makeup why cant i have it on the plane!!!!!

Submitted by Rachel on

I have a jar of mustard and a jar of marmalade that are unopened and I bought as gifts for my family. Do those count as liquids?

Submitted by Blogger Bob on

Hi Rachel. Yes, those fall into the liquid category.

Thanks,

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Evelyn - Africa... on

To me it is not too much of an inconvenience to just check what needs to be checked or get the tiny little bottles and put them in a plastic bag. The water thing seems unrealistic but it only takes one person to do something stupid and unfortunately it's a "ruin it for the rest of us" type of thing, but I'd rather that than the alternative.

Submitted by Whisky Barrel on

I haven't flown in awhile and neglected to drink my Odwalla smoothie prior to the big security scan. A TSA guy took it from me. He let go through the 6 juice boxes I had for my kids. Is 24 ounces in individually wrapped 4 ounce containers really safer than one 12 oz bottle?

Submitted by Michael on

I just plan on buying all liquids I may need once I have landed in my destination city. One quick 15 minute stop into a Dollar Store or Wal-Mart which are located in most every state saves you a lot of TIME and hassle at the airport.

Pages