Considering banning all Carry-on luggage

[dcedwards]

I just heard this morning that the FAA was considering banning all carry on luggage on all flights. They would let you carry a small wallet but that would be all - nothing else. No purses, no diaper bags, no toy bags, no computers, no cell phones, nothing. I just about went through the ceiling. I emailed all my senators and representatives including the white house. Then emailed all the senators and representatives on the transportation committee.

I travel on a monthly basis with a 3 year old and ALL my carry on has to do with keeping him occupied and clothed during our trips. Can you imagine flying for 5 hours with nothing for your child to do? And what about diapers, wipes, blankets, snacks, juice. I make a very concerted effort to try to keep my son busy so he doesn't disturb other passengers and they don't have to listen to him whine, scream or cry. But with nothing but a wallet I will definitely be in big trouble.

I can live with them examining every thing in my carry-on luggage. The time involved would be an inconvenience but not a big deal. I can even live with them limiting carry on luggage to only bags that will fit comfortably under your seat but just a small wallet. But just a wallet - Give me a break. That is going too far.

I was wondering if anyone else had heard this? I heard it on FOX from an FAA official. My imagination goes wild....a plane with kids on it . The smell of dirty diapers because you didn't have any to change them into. The cries of kids who are bored and want something to do. The occassional kicking of the seat in front of you, which happens anyways but think how much more often it would be.

Perhaps I'm not seeing the other side of this. Just thought I would ask what others thought about this. This upsets me and I have let my senators and representatives know. What do you think?

[flyingcircus]

EEK, you are painting a vivid picture!!!

Maybe everyone could compromise, and allow only one carry on per psgr. like they do on the international flights!

:crazy: :crazy:

[dcedwards]

Common sense? Hmmm!!! We will see what prevails in this time of tightened security. Like I said searching...every single piece...doesn't bother me...but throwing the baby out with the bath water does start to concern me.

[Luv2Dream]

My thought is that the airline could provide a "baby pack" when you get on the plane, which could include coloring book, crayons, small doll like that in a McD's happy meal, juice box, cookies, etc. and for really small children, it would include diapers, baby wipes, you get the picture. This would not only save US from carrying all the world with us but it would also prevent the carry-on luggage. Might this work? Just a thought.

[DebbieB]

I cannot see that happening, not totally. Will the airlines be responsible for laptops and other sensitive electronic stuff going through their baggage systems? You know how your luggage usually comes out, scraped and bent. No purses? There is STUFF you need to have with you. What about medicines? I could see limiting it to one and regulating the size. I hate to see people coming on with those wheeled suitcases and trying to stuff them in the overhead. That's what should go first.

[Disnydad]

I would not mind limiting carryons to one, scanned & hand searched bag. It would make getting on and off the plane faster for sure.

[Tiffany]

I heard this and would not be happy either. What about medications that people have to take. Some medications have to be keep at room temp and what about if they lost your luggage with your medications in them. That would be a big mess. I am also not a good flyer and need to listen to CDs and or read a book while I am on the plane. They can search everything that they want to but at least one carryon is needed just to carry personal items.

[Beverly Lynn]

they used to give out little packs for kids. they cut it out to save money. so they won't do that again. electronics are not covered under the baggage agreement either. I agree with the one carry on per person. this would also eliminate the over stuffing of the overhead compartments as well. they just to quit panicking right now and going overboard...because they were too lax before they are going overboard the other way now. too little too late.

[Laurajean1014]

I really would not mind. Although I did just buy a portable dvd player and dh has to bring his laptop on the plane. But if they showed a movie and gave kids crayons and paper, I would be willing to pack it away (along with insurance).

Think of it: Less to carry, less time getting in and out of plane, less to walk around in at terminal and carefree worry before pre-boarding.

I don't think it would be all that crazy, however, baggage claim would chew up all the free time you'd get pre-boarding!

How about packing light???

[Planogirl]

What?! No purse! And where are we supposed to put our airline tickets? Could we at least wear a jacket with big inside pockets?

What about the medication I have to take? Or cameras? Or like someone wisely pointed out, things for a baby?

This is getting to be a bit too much IMO. :(

[R4racing]

I could do without a carry on for myself if I had to, but it just makes no sense to me to not allow diaper bags. I understand that some people carry everything but the kitchen sink in them, but at bare minimum most kids under 2, and a lot under 3 pretty much require the diaper bag. I could not imagine being on a flight that was sitting back in line to take off on a snowy Jan day out of say, O'Hare, bound for of all places Orlando. They would pretty much have to have diapers available on board then or it would make for some nasty flights. Imagine a 4 hour delay with no bottles, no sippy cups, the only diapers the ones you could get out of a machine or airport gift shop. I also think it would hurt the gift shops as who would buy gifts that you cannot carry on.

[pbhunt]

They are not taking my purse away from me!!!!:)

[seashoreCM]

With no carry ons, there would be lots of wasted space in the cabin and perhaps times when the cargo hold won't fit everything.

They should consider shrink wrapping all the carry ons (people could get out things like diapers and coloring books first) and anyone found unwrapping his carry on during flight would be penalized.

Other travel tips:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/travel.htm

[flyingcircus]

Hey seashoreCM,

I like that idea!!! Any idea on where I can buy the stock for the shrink wrapping Company!!
:jester: :jester:

[GAIL HAYDEN]

I am sure the FAA is "considering" many things, however, until it becomes fact, I would not get all worked up. There is NOTHING mentioned of this on the FAA website, or on CBS's website, or NBC's or ABC's. In fact the only thing being mentioned about airtravel is about arming pilots.
Let's not panic folks. :)
As an aside, I am not disputing the original poster's word, just saying that right know it is a consideration, not a rule.

[adamak]

I think we're going way overboard if they ban carry on bags. Is that true security, or is that trading convience for peace of mind.
If there is no carry on luggage, can we really prevent what had happened? No.
If there is no carry on, can we really prevent crazy people from shipping bombs? No.
If there is no carry on, can we prevent some nuts from hijacking the plane? No.

What's next? Ban bags on trains? Ban bags on subways? tighter security is a good thing. But being paranoid is not helpful. I think we should focus on the real issues, like, using intelligence to figure out who those 0.01% of the populations are....instead of band-aiding what had happened before. If we do not do so, we will always be a step behind those crazy cold blooded killers.

[dcedwards]

Good conversation. Gail Hayden -- you are right -- and I take no offense. However, the FAA spokesperson should not be bringing it up on national TV if it isn't actually being considered. Perhaps they were floating a balloon to see the reaction. They got mine!!!! And it wasn't positive. It will be interesting to see what my senators and representatives say. I will keep everyone posted on any responses I get, if any.

I agree with adamark in that we tend to be going overboard in many areas. I realize and know that security was very lax. Yes we need to tighten it up. However, let's look at those areas where the increased security can actually make a difference and not just "make us feel better."

I was really curious to see what other people's reactions would be. If it were just me flying I would strongly object to not being able to take my purse as a carry on. If I could take that on then I would be fine. However, as a mom with an active three year old the thought of no diaper/toy bag would drive me to insanity ... entertaining my son for five hours with no toys, etc. What a nightmare.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one that had a negative reaction to this suggestion or consideration. I just think it is important that as these things come up that we take the time to let those in authority know our thoughts. Afterall, that is one of the things that makes America great.

I love this forum. Such inquisitive minds and great thinkers.

[robinb]

My thought is that the airline could provide a "baby pack" when you get on the plane, which could include coloring book, crayons, small doll like that in a McD's happy meal, juice box, cookies, etc. and for really small children, it would include diapers, baby wipes, you get the picture.


JAL did this when we flew to Tokyo. We had a couple of diapers, wipes, a bib, baby food and a couple of toys.

[Dizzy-Disney4]

I also heard about this consideration. But, they said they would allow diaper bags, purses, and wallets...nothing else. At least thats what the report that I heard said.

[Lewisc]

Many people going on vacation bring expensive cameras and camcorders and airlines don't have any liability if these are checked. I don't think a complete ban would be accepted. One airline (SWA?) was experimenting with limiting carryons to 15 pounds. That may be way to allow people to carry on what they need but limit the quantity to allow easier and more thorough searching.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

Limiting them to 15#, OH WONDERFUL!!!!!! Great solution to a lot of problems.
We flew SWA last week and they did allow two carryons per person, in addition to two checked bags.
Thanks, Lewis, you made my day!!!! :) Hope this happens.

[ducklite]

Originally posted by GAIL HAYDEN
I am sure the FAA is "considering" many things, however, until it becomes fact, I would not get all worked up. There is NOTHING mentioned of this on the FAA website, or on CBS's website, or NBC's or ABC's. In fact the only thing being mentioned about airtravel is about arming pilots.
Let's not panic folks. :)
As an aside, I am not disputing the original poster's word, just saying that right know it is a consideration, not a rule.

Thank you Gail, for a voice of reason. There are so many rumours flying right now! Until it appears in print on your carriers web site, don't believe it!

Anne

[flyingcircus]

I would gladly check the BAGS UNDER MY EYES!!! Ha Ha- just a lil' humor!
:smooth: :smooth:

[GAIL HAYDEN]

Anne,
You are welcome. There is no sense getting worked up over something that will probably never come to pass. We went through all this emotional tizzy stuff when they changed the MKC program to DC. It was truly amazing, not to mention annoying. This is, of course, a far more serious matter and it is probably a very poor analogy, but, getting a severe case of agnst is truly silly. Wait and see is my motto. :)

[GAIL HAYDEN]

flyingcircus,
LOL, and I would not mind if they lost my "bags". ;)

[JandD Mom]

I have children, and it would be a royal pain for me not to bring a carry on of stuff to keep them occupied. However, if the government recommended it for safety reasons, I would certainly accept it.

My idea on how to deal with this is similar to what many retail stores do with their employees. Allow people to bring carry on bags as long as you can see through them. If a mother wants to bring diapers, bottles, etc on a trip, no problem, put them in a clear plastic bag in which anything can be readily seen. Such cases or even clear plastic convenience store bags are not hard to come by. Anything else should be very small and inspected by hand, completely. They should limit those things to very small items. If someone wants to bring breakable items or expensive items on a flight, then they should pay for special handling.

I also agree with getting rid of seat assignments in advance. While this may be a big pain to groups travelling together, many airlines, including low cost carriers, already do this. This way there is protection from the planting of devices on the inside of planes.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

I am not sure how not assigning seats would prevent planting things. I am also unaware of any airline doing this other than SWA. Who are the others?
Limiting carry ons to 15#, that would be a very rational rule. That way, we who choose to carry laptops, digital cameras, etc. could. And....we would have the added bonus of NOT being clipped in the legs by children whose parents thought those adorable cases on wheels for kids were a wonderful thing, not to mention the adults who forget that they have this thing behind them and take huge turns and trip or hit others.
I feel secure that the airlines will figure out something to do for the children who need to be amused every minute of a flight. Mine were easily amused or occupied with a book to read or a book to read to them, but, that was before Gameboys and the incredible need to avoid discipline and amuse them every second.
As I said before, lets just wait and see what happens and lets not get ourselves into a "tizzy" about something that has not been discussed, except by on FAA agent, and nothing has happened. Working yourselves up about this is only going to cause more agnst. IMHO, that is silly.

[JandD Mom]

Gail,

In addition to SWA, Spirit air does not give seat assignments at all. I thought I heard AirTran does it as well.

[Planogirl]

I could get away with just a few books (I need one too!), my camera, medication and a wallet if need be. But I would still need something to put this stuff in.

Thanks for the reminder that we shouldn't panic before anything actually happens. The weight limit on carry ons is a great idea IMO.

[ducklite]

I wouldn't have a problem with the ticket agent asking what general area you want to be seated in, and then assigning those seats for your party, but you don't find out what ones you are actually in until you arrive. That would be an effective compromise. It would still add the element of not knowing that you were in seat "x" in advance, but you would still know that your party was seated together in the general area you want to be in, and that you still have a window or aisle seat. In my case, if I requested to be in a row within 5 rows of the center of the plane emergency exit(s), in an aisle seat, it would give them 20 potential seats to put me in. That's pretty good odds in the favor of safety IMHO.

Anne

[Lewisc]

Gail--The thinking is advance seat assignments allow acomplises to put weapons in the seat pockets. With all the schedule changes going on advance seat assignments are probably of less value.
I've heard SW may be required to assign seats (probably when you check in at the gate) so they can link the passenger name with the seat (in case of disaster). Right now there is no way of determing which seat a passenger is occupying.

[dcedwards]

I do believe that there is a difference between a "tizzy" and a healthy discussion. If you look at the original post it said "Perhaps I'm not seeing both sides of this but I was just curious what others thought." This is asking for opinions -- from both sides.

I have since spoken to some FAA officials who said that a lot of things are being discussed and it is always possible that they could become the rule. So, obviously, this has been discussed by more than one agent. It is in a group of things being discussed and in the future, possibly recommended. I have found, in our country's history, that often things become the "rule" when there seems to be no apparent objection to them. While I understand the need to wait and see what happens, I also understand the need to let those, we have elected, know how we feel on issues, even ones like these. That is the American Way. This forum allows us to bring those issues to others attention. It also allows us to be able to try to see the other side of things. That is good. It helps us as we process all this information. So I don't think anyone is getting worked up into a "tizzy". Perhaps I am wrong but as I read this thread I think we are simply voicing opinions and having a healthy electronic discussion. Discussing the what ifs and alternatives. A lot of good ideas are presented on this forum. That is wonderful. And while we may not agree with all of them, they are legitimate because they belong to unique individuals. And we are able to discuss them in a civil manner. That in itself, is an accomplishment.

As far as entertaining kids on planes. I flew regularly for 15 years without a child. During that time I saw many things concerning kids -- good and bad. I have been flying at least once a month with my son since he was 6 months old. My goal, always, is to bring things that will help me entertain my son so he doesn't bother other passengers. I have been thanked many times by both passengers and flight attendants. My son is easily entertained, by himself, at home. He loves to read. But there are few kids who will read and color for 5 hours. Discipline has nothing to do with it. A lot has to do with ther personality of the child and many other factors. Distraction and keeping him busy work much better, in my opinion, on an airplane. I have seen both and chose to do the later. Fellow passengers, at least from what they tell me, find it refreshing that he can do a variety of things, in his seat, and not bother anyone. At age 3 I am thrilled with this. That is my goal. Parenting is a very personal thing and people quickly take offense at broad statements that put everyone in a single category. Like I said before, it is important that all of us try to understand different views.

Back to the issue of carry ons. I really like the 15# rule. On a flight I took in August one passenger brought on an oversize backpack. The kind where you put the sleeping bag in the top. It took up a whole bin. No one said anything. They let him stow it above. I believe, in the discussion about carry ons, common sense will prevail -- at least I'm hoping. At times I think, if the airlines would strictly enforce the carry on rules that they have right now, many of the problems would be eliminated. We only bring on one carry on per person. And it always fits under the seat in front of us.

I think we can find a happy compromise between no carryons and large carryons. Safety is the issue. And if this is a good thing for airlines to eliminate all carry ons then I would assume we would also need to do the same for all forms of public transportation. Doesn't make much sense when you look at it that way.

But I enjoy this type of discussion. I'm glad to see that others feel the way I feel and it is also educational to look at the views of those who disagree.

[Ted and Holly]

Pan Am annonced yesterday or today that they have banned carry-on luggage on their flights.

Pan Am has a limited number of flights and airports serviced but this is major nontheless.

They say you can carry a wallet or purse and a baby bag if you have kids.

It was said that Pan Am was leading this movement with more airlines expected to do something similar.

I do not check my cameras. I would not check them even on Pan Am when I can watch the luggage being placed on the plane.

I could live with a complete carry-on search but that would be logistically impossible.

Ted

[yoopermom]

if they only allow a "purse", who is going to make the decision on what constitutes a purse? I have a female relative (who shall remain anonymous for obvious reasons) who's "purse" would easily weigh in at 10 lbs, if not more! I think it'd be easier to go with a flat out poundage limit, no matter what the "container".
Terri the Yoopermom
(whose purse only weighs four pounds, as weighed at a wedding shower last weekend...)

[JandD Mom]

Well said.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

Lewis,
They are still checking the aircraft before leaving the airport, right? So, the discussion about seating assignments is somewhat moot, right?
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

[JandD Mom]

Gail,

I don't understand your comment to Lewis. Apparently, they are not checking the aircraft before leaving the airport, that's the problem. To check each seat, top to bottom, underneath and in front, would take as much or more work as going through everyone's carry on. Then there is also the problem of the people with access to the plane (caterers, cleaning people etc) who are not necessarily checked before they get their job. Since the found box cutters, etc, stashed (apparently) on planes after Sept 11 (apparently put there sometime before) they believe these things may have been left for the intended passenger in that seat. Hypothetically, if my accomplice expects me to be in seat 11C, and, in fact, I am in 20D, it may be harder for me to get to my contraband.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

dcedwards,
A healthy discussion is always great, however, in some instances this has become, IMHO, almost militant. Nothing you have said, however, was addressed in my last post, nor was it in any way pointed at you.
I think you have done a wonderful thing by writing and letting your opinions be known. Many would rather gripe than write and perhaps accomplish something. In essence, I do agree with your opinions, not because I have children of a young age, but, because there are things I carry aboard to keep me occupied. IE: a book. If this is enacted it will "hit" us all in a different way.
Parenting is, indeed, a personal thing, however, it appears that it is becoming a very lost art.
I do think you are one of the rare ones in that you care that you are not disturbing others.
Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Too many who are completely oblivious of what their child/ren does/do and what disturbances they cause. I see a lot, as do a lot of us.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

JandD Mom
According to the new FAA regs. they are checking each and every plane before it leaves the ground for bombs and other "no no's". I do know that SWA closed the door for a good 15-20 mins before boarding to check on our return flight.
It is also my understanding that all personal getting near an aircraft have been checked out.
I am sure they found stuff stashed before 9/11/01, however, they(airlines) had to go over each and every plane before it was allowed to fly again. To have found items is not a surprise.
The faa website has some great stuff on it.

[JandD Mom]

I am happy they are checking the planes before they allow boarding. But who exactly is doing the check? Police? Pilots? Flight attendants? The same airport workers who never had a criminal history background check?

Why not have a check, AND assign seats only at airport check in? They used to do it that way, in the dark ages.:D

Thanks Gail for the tip on the FAA web site. I will have to take a look.

[Lewisc]

Gail--you asked why advance seat assignments might be eliminated. No one element of security is infaliable. Having overlapping levels helps instill confidence. On the long haul I'm not sure how complete an aircraft inspection can be betwen flights. I think (with the schedule changes) airlines probably are looking forward to an excuse not to assign seats in advance. It also makes it harder for hijackers to make sure they are getting the seats they want.
Curbside check-in is another area open to debate. Since bags are checked with your name they have the ability to pull your luggage if you don't board the plane. It should be doable to add enough security so people can't deposit luggage directly on the belt or cart using counterfeit tags. The idea is to make it harder for people to do bad things.

[mikek]

First- all major sporting events have instituted a similar (if not the same rule). Only what you have in your hands, diaper or medical bags, and small pocketbooks are allowed. I was at the Yankee game last night and they enforced it pretty tightly- many people were upset with backpacks as they were not allowed in with them. But Isaw many women carry in pocket books, and loads of people with bags of chips, etc. And our friends were not bothered about their diaper bag.

Second- in my own opinion its somewhat excessive and only really makes people feel better rather than getting to the real problems- But since their intention is that i may get off the plane or out of the stadium alive with my children i dont really get that bent about it. It's not the airlines trying to save money or flighht attendants trying to make their lives easier, it is the government trying to save lives.

AS several have posted- they are 'looking at' many things. I'm sure they will pick a couple that i will not appreciate or think appropriate or even necessary, but if the sum total of the efforts are a safer place to raise my family than so be it.

(For the record- I have a 10 month old and a 2 and a half year old so i'd have to figure out how to keep them happy too- especially on the 5 hour flights to visit their grandparents in AZ)

[JandD Mom]

Dear Gail,

I did look on the FAA web site for the info about the plane being checked before it leaves. I can't find it. That site is a tangled web indeed. Could you please post the link if you have it.

Thanks!:jester:

[GAIL HAYDEN]

here you go:

http://www.faa.gov/apa/testimony/2001/921tejg.htm
http://www.faa.gov/
http://www.dot.gov/
Hope this helps, these are GREAT sites.
Take care.

[GAIL HAYDEN]

Lewis,
I completely understand and agree with what you are saying. If the seating goes as planned everyone then can complain about "cattle call" boarding. LOL.

[dcedwards]

Isn't it ironic that when SWA instituted its "no assigned seat policy" that they took a lot of heat for that. They did it in an attempt to save money and in the end may have assisted them in safety areas.

We, primarily fly SWA. I'm used to the "cattle call" boarding procedure. When I didn't have a young one we would arrive "way ahead" of time to be sure we got in the first 30. Then we realized if we were in the first 60, if the flight originated at our stop, it would be fine. I guess I've gotten used to it. Now that I have a young one, under 5, they allow me to pre-board so the number I get doesn't make that much difference ... but we still get there early ... I always feel badly if I get to preboard and my number is higher than 60. On the other hand, now that I think about it, I should probably wait and get a higher number so others could get the lower number ... a new thought.

Gail - I appreciate your comments. Thanks. I, too, have seen many instances where parents react much differently to their children's actions than I would. I am hoping that as time goes on parenting will become a popular activity instead of a lost art. Wouldn't that be nice.

As far as carry ons, the fact that Pan Am has now made this come true, I think makes it even more important for those who might object to make your voices heard. I agree that defining a diaper is somewhat hard to do. I have several LARGE diaper bags that I don't usually carry because they are so big. Now comes the question, what constitutes a diaper bag vs. a regular carry on bag? I, too, have seen some rather obnoxiously large purses. And so the debate goes on. I am glad to hear that they at least the FAA or Pan Am scaled the original proposal back from nothing and will allow diaper bags and purses. I can fit tons of things in my large diaper bag...enough to keep him preoccupied ... it just won't be quite as organized as two bags ... oh well.

I just want to make sure that we aren't giving up some of our "freedoms" of travel just to "feel" secure. I want what is done to have a DIRECT impact on security. And until I started this thread I hadn't really thought about the seat assignment thing. That is interesting. I just love this forum. Really gets the creative thinking juices going. And with staying home with a 3 year old it keeps my thinker sharp.

[skeezixspud]

If you are going to a sporting event, you know that you will be there 4 hours at the most, and that you can leave at any time if an emergency arises. Not so when flying. Often in winter, several thousand travellers end up sleeping at 'Camp O'Hare' for 2 days because the airport is closed due to weather, and most ground transport does not run, either. (I guess in that case cross-country skis would be a sensible carry-on!) What happens if your flight sits on the runway for 6 hours, or another passenger throws up on you mid-flight? You can't reclaim a checked bag to get a change of clothes at 35,000 feet.

The reality is that when air traffic is at full capacity in this country, the smart passenger travelling in winter carries enough supplies to last for at least 24 hours, and the smart parent carries sufficient diversion to entertain a young child for at least 16 hours, so as to avoid annoying other passengers.

European carriers have restricted carry-ons to around 12 lbs for some time now, and they tell the truth about why. It saves fuel and minimizes the risk of injury if a bag falls out of an overhead bin.

[DebbieB]

I just read an article on CNN where President Bush is talking about new airline security. Nothing was mentioned about carry-ons.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/27/rec.bush.airports/index.html

[Planogirl]

dcedwards, I also always did my best to keep my son from bothering others. No loud noise, no kicking of the seat in front of him, no playing with the tray table and so forth. Sometimes it doesn't work however. I can count all of the true melt-downs he had on one hand. Unfortunately one was on an airplane and it happened after a VERY lengthy delay by the airline. I apologized to all nearby and did my best to quiet him. I was embarassed but couldn't do much about it.

Now, if I can take a reasonable sized purse which can hold a few small books, a Gameboy if it's still allowed, my camera, wallet and a few other small items, I'll do just fine. However, men should also be able to carry some kind of small bag, it's only fair.

[mikek]

skeezixspud-

Sorry if i was unclear- but i was NOT comparing a sporting event to traveling.

My point was that the policy (at least at sporting venues) is not draconian (sp?) and they were allowing diaper bags and pocket books and any loose items into the stadium. I was atttemping to quell the fury by sharing my experience.

that aside-
We're in a time where there's actually a legitimate debate about giving pilots GUNS and people are sweating the size of their carry ons? I'm reminded of the the term NIMBY. "do whateveryou need to do- just dont inconvenience me."

Here in the NY area today we have THREE or FOUR HOUR traffic jams to get into the city as 2 of the four tunnels are closed for security / emergency vehicle access. In an attempt to mitagate this huge problem a ban on single occupancy vehicles entering the city near ground zero has been implemented during the morning rush hour. People actually have the ____ to complain. For crying out load- they are still pulling out bodies and hoping for the miracle of a live survivor and people are whining that they'll need to take a bus or train to work.

[ducklite]

Originally posted by mikek
skeezixspud-

people are whining that they'll need to take a bus or train to work.

I was a "commuter" for years. It's beyond me why anyone in their right mind would drive in unless they absolutely had to. I did twice in the last three years I worked in Manahattan...

Once as I had an appointment in Northern NJ that I was leaving work early to get to, and there was no way I could have taken the train home then driven to Northern NJ and gotten there on time, I would have had to take the entire day off--btw--I gave a friend a lift in that morning to save her paying the train fare. The other was because I went in for a couple hours before I left to drive to CT for my grandmothers wake and funeral.

I'm sure some people need their car for their job, but I know a lot of people who just think they are too good to ride mass transit with the rest of us...

Anne

[dcedwards]

Planogirl --

I know what you mean. The same thing happened to us. We had been sitting on the tarmack for over 3 hours...and it just happened. I was so embarrased but like you said there are times when you just can't do anything about it. Most of the passengers were very understanding but there was one that simply turned her nose up and said "hmmm". I apologized again. You would hope some would be a bit more understanding but that is how it goes. In that instance you just want to say to your kid --- see that seat over there you can kick it all you want -- of course I didn't but the thought did cross my mind. Personally I can't wait until he will sit and play a gameboy. He isn't quite ready for that but my day is coming soon -- I hope.

I also agree that men should be allowed to carry something on too. It will be interesting to see where all this goes. I just know that the stuff I put in my carry on is essential, at least to me. Of course, that is how everyone looks at it, right?