Carry-On Banned Items

[disneyldwjr]

What about gum or friut snacks? Granola bars. I always take on plane for kids.

That should not be a problem. It is not a liquid or a gel.

 

[seashoreCM]

Lack of enforcement is not an invitation to violate the rules.

I beg to differ. Lack of enforcement is an open invitation to violate the rules.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

(Wheel of Fortune)
L_CK _F _NF_RC_M_NT
"THING"
"I would like to buy a vowel"

 

[disneyldwjr]

If the sarcastic and marginally respectful (or disrespectful) manner in which some folks address others in this thread is any indication of how they address TSA agents.... well, you know the rest.

Time for me to go anyway....

Is that something like:you get what you give? Or, you reap what you sow? Or, a bad attitude just begets one? Yep, I know the rest.

 

[disneyldwjr]

I beg to differ. Lack of enforcement is an open invitation to violate the rules.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

(Wheel of Fortune)
L_CK _F _NF_RC_M_NT
"THING"
"I would like to buy a vowel"

Sure it is, just like jumping off a bridge cause someone else did it, or being a lemming and running into the ocean. Didn't you momma teach you that just cause someone else is breaking the rules does not mean you can?

 

[bavaria]

I beg to differ. Lack of enforcement is an open invitation to violate the rules.

For those who choose to violate rules. Others choose to demonstrate civil disobedience in a different forum, or by using different methods.

 

[bavaria]

In the last few weeks I was 'stuck' in various airport security lines behind people who had carryons loaded with banned items - liquids, gels, and other items. I wondered why someone would bring 25 hotel ammenity kits, filled with toothpaste and shampoo, or full size bottles of lotion etc. I was especially curious at my home airport, where the entry doors are all covered with large posters which have full size samples of banned items (ie Colgate, Listerine, etc)

At first I thought that maybe there were just a large number of people who hadn't watched the news, read a paper, or checked the internet before flying. But these were mostly English speaking travellers, who didn't really react to the TSA, or seemed defiant when their items were removed.

Reading this site as well as flyertalk.com and a few others, it now dawns on me that these were probably not woefully uneducated travellers, but rather they were trying to make a point by challenging TSA or CATSA or other agency.

While I applaud their effort to take some sort of action, those actions seriously delayed those of us behind them. I watched 5 CATSA agents deal with one person's luggage last week, and was frankly surprised that he was eventually let through after his antics. So I stand behind my assertion that civil disobedience is effective, but it has an appropriate time and place.

bavaria
(who is very politically aware, and has practiced a number of acts of disobedience in her day, and will continue to do so)

 

[salmoneous]

Indeed, many (but not all) folks who resent rules so passionately cannot help but project that sentiment whenever they encounter the rules, and many (but not all) reasonable folks charged with enforcing the rules cannot help but perceive such projected emotion as something suspicious. It's simply human nature at work.

I'd change "many" to "some". I'm as big a critic of the worse-than-useless ban on liquids as anybody. But I'm not only about the most efficient get-through-security guy you'll ever see; I'm also darn nice to the TSA agents. They didn't make the rules.

In my experience, the folks who understand the pointlessness of the liquids ban are experienced flyers, who just want to get through security as quickly as possible and who meet a lot of TSA agents along the way. My guess is we are - on average - actually nicer to the TSA folks than the less frequent travelers who believe the nonsense that the liquid ban is there for safely, but don't understand that their near-life-size Texas belt buckle can't go through the metal detectors.

 

[NotUrsula]

Originally posted by Bavaria:
For those who choose to violate rules. Others choose to demonstrate civil disobedience in a different forum, or by using different methods.

But what else *is* civil disobedience, if it isn't breaking "rules"? Writing a letter to your Congressional representative is a protest, but it isn't civil disobedience.

Merriam-Webster's definition:
Main Entry: civil disobedience
Function: noun
: refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government

 

[bavaria]

But what else *is* civil disobedience, if it isn't breaking "rules"? Writing a letter to your Congressional representative is a protest, but it isn't civil disobedience.

Merriam-Webster's definition:
Main Entry: civil disobedience
Function: noun
: refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government

I agree with the definition of civil disobedience, but I am simply saying that this may not be method (protesting at security) that everyone who wants to protest chooses to use.