PDA

View Full Version : More Carry-On Items Banned on Planes



Pages : [1] 2

Valerie
08-10-2006, 01:07 PM
I understand about being cautious, but this is getting ridiculous. We're not able to travel freely anymore. And forget about quick in and out at the airport. Between security (which I understand) now we have to check virtually everything we've packed. So much for carry-on bags. :down: And honestly, if a crazy person was going to blow up a plane, who's to say he/she wouldn't hide something in baby food?

In response to the elevated terror threat, the TSA has implemented the following security measures on all flights.

BANNED:
∑ Liquids or gels of any kind in carry-on luggage. Items must be checked.
∑ This includes all beverages, shampoo, suntan lotion, creams, tooth paste, hair gel, and other items of similar consistency.

ALLOWED:
∑ Baby formula, breast milk, or juice if a baby or child is traveling.
∑ Prescription medicine with a name that matches the passengerís ticket, and insulin and essential other non-prescription medicines.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:12 PM
It does suck but it's needed. I'd rather pack my toothpaste and other items in my checked bag than risk some terrorist blowing the airplane up.

Like was said in another thread: "welcome to the 21st century".

LtFinFan66
08-10-2006, 01:15 PM
Kills my plans for my trip to Buffalo. I am going carry-on only. Guess I will have to pick up toothpaste and shampoo on that end.

My question....if you have a small toothpaste tube in your picket, how would they know?? They don't xray your body? and you only empty pockets if you beep

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:17 PM
It does suck but it's needed. I'd rather pack my toothpaste and other items in my checked bag than risk some terrorist blowing the airplane up.

Like was said in another thread: "welcome to the 21st century".

if we're afraid of toothpaste, the terrorists have already won.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:17 PM
You have to empty your pockets at the security checkpoints. That's been ongoing for a while. I wouldn't want to be you if you tried to sneak in that tube of toothpaste.

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 01:18 PM
[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][B]I understand about being cautious, but this is getting ridiculous. We're not able to travel freely anymore. And forget about quick in and out at the airport. Between security (which I understand) now we have to check virtually everything we've packed. So much for carry-on bags. :down: And honestly, if a crazy person was going to blow up a plane, who's to say he/she wouldn't hide something in baby food?



The security for food service personnel isn't all that thorough, either. Say you're boarding a plane in Detroit. Food service guy smuggles Suspicious Hair Gel plus Suspicious Toothpick Detonator onto plane. Islamic guy knows where to find the stuff after he boards, slips into his bag for further assembly either when he's doing potty, or when he has his head between his knees in the airline seat.

Dastardly!

Patti

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:18 PM
Kills my plans for my trip to Buffalo. I am going carry-on only. Guess I will have to pick up toothpaste and shampoo on that end.

My question....if you have a small toothpaste tube in your picket, how would they know?? They don't xray your body? and you only empty pockets if you beep

that's why a lot of this security is worthless. It's just eye candy so some government executive can justify his six-figure salary with the outward appearance of security.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:19 PM
if we're afraid of toothpaste, the terrorists have already won.

Until they have the ability to test for these kinds of chemicals involved in this kind of plot, I'd rather they err on the side of caution.

I don't think having to check toothpaste is a "victory" for the terrorists. It's an annoyance but nothing more.

LtFinFan66
08-10-2006, 01:19 PM
You have to empty your pockets at the security checkpoints. That's been ongoing for a while. I wouldn't want to be you if you tried to sneak in that tube of toothpaste.I thought they only made you empty pockets if you set off the metal detector

Meathead
08-10-2006, 01:20 PM
i doubt that its needed and would bet its more likely a mainly psychological measure

but i wont complain about it because it will work itself out. we are getting smarter and dont just accept what we are told anymore, courtesy of king george

given that theyve continued to fail the penetration tests ill be interested to see if this helps them or not. my guess is no. we should know in about a year

but i can just imagine people in a room looking at each other for answers and coming up with this. now we have to wait for the roll to come to rest

btw - didnt they ask the heebs, those people know how to foil plane attacks

EricStratton
08-10-2006, 01:22 PM
Send all your stuff by UPS and pick it up at the hotel.

It's worth the $15.00 IMO

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:22 PM
Everybody *****ing about our security measures needs to fly on an El-Al fllight and undergo the screening that the Israelis put you through.

EricStratton
08-10-2006, 01:25 PM
I can picture the suitcase lobby fighting this but it would be nice if some regulations were put in to really limit what people drag down the aisles of an airplane.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:32 PM
Until they have the ability to test for these kinds of chemicals involved in this kind of plot, I'd rather they err on the side of caution.

I don't think having to check toothpaste is a "victory" for the terrorists. It's an annoyance but nothing more.

one of the many annoyances that taken as a whole have changed our lifestyle- that's why it's a victory.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:33 PM
Everybody *****ing about our security measures needs to fly on an El-Al fllight and undergo the screening that the Israelis put you through.

are you suggesting that the US is now as unsafe as Israel?

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 01:35 PM
no biggie really at least it will be quicker to board and un board airplanes, I assume ther will be little or no carry on baggage soon

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:38 PM
No, I'm saying that you would freak if you saw what the Israelis do for airline security.

You can ***** and moan about our security measures all you want but they are in place to keep us as safe as possible. I'll gladly pack my toothpaste in my checked baggage if it means we deny the crazies in the world a means to blow us up.

Gunzlingr
08-10-2006, 01:39 PM
no biggie really at least it will be quicker to board and un board airplanes, I assume ther will be little or no carry on baggage soon


I can picture the suitcase lobby fighting this but it would be nice if some regulations were put in to really limit what people drag down the aisles of an airplane.

When we went to DC, some of the carry on bags were bigger than my main suitcase. I think carry on should be banned.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:40 PM
no biggie really at least it will be quicker to board and un board airplanes, I assume ther will be little or no carry on baggage soon

I disagree. I think it will take LONGER to get through security because if they see something that looks like lotion, toothpaste or shampoo in a carry-on, they'll have to inspect it by hand.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 01:42 PM
That's my point, LA, you can't carry much of anything on the plane anymore. If I'm going away for a weekend trip and I only have one bag, I would prefer not to hassle with baggage claim. By checking bags, you're adding a lot of unneeded extra time and inconvenience, IMHO.

And, like I said, who's to say something won't be carried through in baby food? If you're going to ban my water, the baby's water should be banned too. I fully understand the need for safety precautions, but this is getting out of hand.

BAM
08-10-2006, 01:43 PM
We did a little test to see if we could get through security with lighters in our bags on our recent flights. We were able to get back with 4 of them. They found one on our flight home and that's it. Security at BWI was a joke.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:43 PM
No, I'm saying that you would freak if you saw what the Israelis do for airline security.

You can ***** and moan about our security measures all you want but they are in place to keep us as safe as possible. I'll gladly pack my toothpaste in my checked baggage if it means we deny the crazies in the world a means to blow us up.


See, you're making the false assumption that these security measures actually keep us safer. Some of them do- some of them are just ridiculous.

You show me one piece of evidence that proves having our shoes X-rayed has prevented even ONE terrorist attack and I will never complain about having to remove my shoes in an airport again. Until then, it's a knee-jerk reaction to something one guy tried once and wasn't even successful.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:44 PM
Hey Op, maybe you should take out a full page add in the NY Times or other national paper pleading to the terrorists to stop trying to develop new ways to blow us up because people can't carry toothpaste with them anymore. I'm sure they'll respect your wishes so they don't inconvenience you.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 01:44 PM
I disagree. I think it will take LONGER to get through security because if they see something that looks like lotion, toothpaste or shampoo in a carry-on, they'll have to inspect it by hand.

im talking about getting on and off a plane, all this is good for the economy. They will need to hire more TSA to enforce the new laws and more people will say screw it and buy travel size shampoo, toothpaste etc when tehy arrive at their destination, only problem is if you get stuck overnight somewhere you will have more smelly people on the plane

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:45 PM
We did a little test to see if we could get through security with lighters in our bags on our recent flights. We were able to get back with 4 of them. They found one on our flight home and that's it. Security at BWI was a joke.

my point exactly- it's a big hassle without making us safer. Either make us safer, or don't hassle us- but don't inconvenience everyone unless there's some benefit.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 01:45 PM
See, you're making the false assumption that these security measures actually keep us safer. Some of them do- some of them are just ridiculous.

You show me one piece of evidence that proves having our shoes X-rayed has prevented even ONE terrorist attack and I will never complain about having to remove my shoes in an airport again. Until then, it's a knee-jerk reaction to something one guy tried once and wasn't even successful.

The fact that there haven't been any other attempts via a shoe bomb proves that it works don't you think? :idea:

Valerie
08-10-2006, 01:48 PM
I have to say, I hate taking my shoes off too. I usually don't wear socks so I'm barefoot. When I went to NY a few weeks ago, there was a man in front of me with his shoes off. His feet were sweating so badly, he left footprints. I was disgusted to have to walk behind in on his wet, gross footprints. It's unsanitary!

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:49 PM
Hey Op, maybe you should take out a full page add in the NY Times or other national paper pleading to the terrorists to stop trying to develop new ways to blow us up because people can't carry toothpaste with them anymore. I'm sure they'll respect your wishes so they don't inconvenience you.

maybe we should find out if terrorists are actually trying to put explosives in toothpast tubes or if it's even possible to put enough explosives in a toothpaste tube to damage an airliner or maybe we should find other ways to detect explosives besides all-out banning things.

And if toothpaste tubes are so dangerous why are they allowed on airplanes even in carry-on luggage? Ever heard of remote detonation?

or better yet- maybe we should treat the root causes of terrorism instead of the symptoms.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 01:52 PM
The fact that there haven't been any other attempts via a shoe bomb proves that it works don't you think? :idea:

or maybe it proves that the shoe bomb idea wasn't a very good one in the first place so the terrorists abandoned it.

The Simpsons explains it best:


Homer: Well, there's not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is sure doing its job.
Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, sweetie.
Lisa: Dad, what if I were to tell you that this rock keeps away tigers.
Homer: Uh-huh, and how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work. It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: I see.
Lisa: But you don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 01:55 PM
I figure a good Terror scare is deflecting the American attention from some other issue

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:10 PM
maybe we should find out if terrorists are actually trying to put explosives in toothpast tubes or if it's even possible to put enough explosives in a toothpaste tube to damage an airliner or maybe we should find other ways to detect explosives besides all-out banning things.

And if toothpaste tubes are so dangerous why are they allowed on airplanes even in carry-on luggage? Ever heard of remote detonation?

or better yet- maybe we should treat the root causes of terrorism instead of the symptoms.

As an FAA employee I'll clue you in on something.....ALL checked baggage is screened for explosives. Explosives leave a residue that these machines can pick up. Your carry on isn't screened, thus the reason for this latest attempt.

An actual threat and the means to impliment it has been identified and you ***** because you can't carry your precious tube of toothpaste on board. Talk about a selfish attitude. OP doesn't like it so it's a stupid idea. Ride a freaking train if it bothers you that much.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:16 PM
If that's the case, AWM, why can't they screen the carry-on bags the same way they do for checked bags? They're already running them through an x-ray machine.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:17 PM
it would take too long and inconvience people like OP

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:18 PM
Because that machine is somewhere in the bowels of the airport (nowhere near the customer check-in) and it would add HOURS to check-in if every single person had to surrender their carry on bags to have the machine sniff it.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:22 PM
Which kinda is my point. Airports are notorious for losing luggage and since I am a travler who rarely checks my bags, it not only annoys me that I have to but it scares me that when I get off the plane at my destination I won't have any of my stuff.

And, we're not just talking about toothpaste. I have a make-up bag, already packed with full size shampoo, conditioner, gel, toothpaste, deoderant, etc. That's a lot of stuff that now has to be checked. And now I have to waste time dealing with baggage claim.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:25 PM
That's my point, LA, you can't carry much of anything on the plane anymore. If I'm going away for a weekend trip and I only have one bag, I would prefer not to hassle with baggage claim. By checking bags, you're adding a lot of unneeded extra time and inconvenience, IMHO.

And, like I said, who's to say something won't be carried through in baby food? If you're going to ban my water, the baby's water should be banned too. I fully understand the need for safety precautions, but this is getting out of hand.
so frikkin' what?? boo frikkin hoo....you can't carry your toiletries on a plane...it is a plane ride for crying out loud...read a book, a newspaper or take a nap...why do people think that the inside of the plane is equivalent to their bedroom?? almost all plane flights (save the ones AWM take) are less than three hours...can't American's make it without putting on make up, sucking down a Starbucks or yacking on the phone for three frikkin' hours? Pathetic.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:27 PM
Which kinda is my point. Airports are notorious for losing luggage and since I am a travler who rarely checks my bags, it not only annoys me that I have to but it scares me that when I get off the plane at my destination I won't have any of my stuff.

And, we're not just talking about toothpaste. I have a make-up bag, already packed with full size shampoo, conditioner, gel, toothpaste, deoderant, etc. That's a lot of stuff that now has to be checked. And now I have to waste time dealing with baggage claim.
notorious?? I have probably flown over 250 times in my life...cannot get to any where from Buffalo without a connection...probably made it through 700 take offs and landings in my life...never lost one bag of luggage...even when our bag was "lost" in Kiev, Ukraine it was eventually found (in less than 24 hours) and made it's way to where we were staying in Donetsk.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:27 PM
It sucks but unfortunately we live in a world where people think it's their religious duty to try and kill us. Until we evolve into the kind of world that Star Trek portrayed (world peace), this is just the way things are going to be.

imbondz
08-10-2006, 02:28 PM
i flew in July and American Airlines lost my luggage, they had it at my door step 7 hours later. It wasn't a big deal, and I went to the store and bought myself some cool clothes just in case it didn't arrive in time.

if that's not the glass half full I don't know what is.

Imbondz :hi5: Imbondz

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:30 PM
As an FAA employee I'll clue you in on something.....ALL checked baggage is screened for explosives. Explosives leave a residue that these machines can pick up. Your carry on isn't screened, thus the reason for this latest attempt.

An actual threat and the means to impliment it has been identified and you ***** because you can't carry your precious tube of toothpaste on board. Talk about a selfish attitude. OP doesn't like it so it's a stupid idea. Ride a freaking train if it bothers you that much.

well why does the machine have to be in the "bowels" of the airport? Why can't they build the equipment into the x-ray machines?

We're so afraid of these guys that we're banning TOOTHPASTE and that doesn't bother you? We're a deodorant ban away from being France.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:31 PM
is Eb on steroids ??

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:31 PM
notorious?? I have probably flown over 250 times in my life...cannot get to any where from Buffalo without a connection...probably made it through 700 take offs and landings in my life...never lost one bag of luggage...even when our bag was "lost" in Kiev, Ukraine it was eventually found (in less than 24 hours) and made it's way to where we were staying in Donetsk.

I never lost a bag in my life until Christmas of this year- they lost it going into Puerto Rico and took about 30 hours getting it back to me. Then on my very next trip, they lost it in Australia and took about 8 hours getting it back to me.

There was a report earlier this year about how there has been a huge increase in lost luggage recently.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:32 PM
well why does the machine have to be in the "bowels" of the airport? Why can't they build the equipment into the x-ray machines?

We're so afraid of these guys that we're banning TOOTHPASTE and that doesn't bother you? We're a deodorant ban away from being France.
:rolleyes: explain to me again why we need toothpaste on an airplane? they don't serve food any more and if you suffer from hallitosis that is that bad you aren't going to pick up anybody on the airplane anyway.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:33 PM
is Eb on steroids ??
why?

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:34 PM
just have noticed a more aggressive tone in your posts

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:34 PM
so frikkin' what?? boo frikkin hoo....you can't carry your toiletries on a plane...it is a plane ride for crying out loud...read a book, a newspaper or take a nap...why do people think that the inside of the plane is equivalent to their bedroom?? almost all plane flights (save the ones AWM take) are less than three hours...can't American's make it without putting on make up, sucking down a Starbucks or yacking on the phone for three frikkin' hours? Pathetic.

Checking baggage is a HUGE hassle- at Dulles it takes like an hour to get your checked bags because the terminals are remote from the main building.

And she's talking about TOILETRIES, not Starbucks or cell phones. Who the **** are these ****ing terrorists to tell US what we can and can't take on planes?

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:36 PM
just have noticed a more aggressive tone in your posts
sick of the persistant whining going on lately...that's all.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:37 PM
Checking baggage is a HUGE hassle- at Dulles it takes like an hour to get your checked bags because the terminals are remote from the main building.

And she's talking about TOILETRIES, not Starbucks or cell phones. Who the **** are these ****ing terrorists to tell US what we can and can't take on planes?
flying is popular...lots of people - lots of bags...the safety of the whole flight takes precedence over the luxury of a few...check the bags...and again, why do you need to carry ANYTHING on a plane??

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:37 PM
:rolleyes: explain to me again why we need toothpaste on an airplane? they don't serve food any more and if you suffer from hallitosis that is that bad you aren't going to pick up anybody on the airplane anyway.

ever take a 15 hour flight to Australia? Ever been stuck in an airport for 20 hours because of a storm? Ever have an airline lose your luggage and you have no toothpaste when you get to the destination, then you have to spend YOUR time and YOUR money looking for it? Frequent business travelers ALWAYS carry toiletries on the plane for precisely these scenarios.

and again: we are letting the terrorists dictate our actions. Regardless of how minor the change is, they are changing the way we do things and we shouldn't be allowing that to happen.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:39 PM
well why does the machine have to be in the "bowels" of the airport? Why can't they build the equipment into the x-ray machines?

We're so afraid of these guys that we're banning TOOTHPASTE and that doesn't bother you? We're a deodorant ban away from being France.

Sure, that's it, just snap your fingers and "build it into" an X-ray machine. Never mind that the machine they use to sniff for explosives is quite large and complex. We'll just slap it on the nearest X-ray machine so everybody can be happy.

Op, you're losing any rational thought, give it up buddy.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:40 PM
ever take a 15 hour flight to Australia? Ever been stuck in an airport for 20 hours because of a storm? Ever have an airline lose your luggage and you have no toothpaste when you get to the destination, then you have to spend YOUR time and YOUR money looking for it? Frequent business travelers ALWAYS carry toiletries on the plane for precisely these scenarios.

and again: we are letting the terrorists dictate our actions. Regardless of how minor the change is, they are changing the way we do things and we shouldn't be allowing that to happen.
Op, I have been to Thailand...I have been to Ukraine...I have been to England...I have flown all over this country...I have been a business traveler...nothing is that much of an inconvience...unless you are going into the deep sub-Sahara all those places have stores that you can buy toothpaste at.

BTW, the terrorists are not telling us what to do...

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:41 PM
flying is a luxury anyway, if you dont want to waste the time in the airport drive, take a train or bus

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:41 PM
flying is popular...lots of people - lots of bags...the safety of the whole flight takes precedence over the luxury of a few...check the bags.

Do you know how ridiculous this logic sounds when you put it in other contexts?

"No one can bring toothpaste on planes because someone, somewhere might try to hide explosives in a toothpaste tube."

Apply it to driving:

"No one can consume alcohol in a building with a parking lot because someone might leave and drive drunk".

Or the Internet:

"No one can use Myspace anymore because pedophiles and rapists use it to meet their victims".

In those cases, does the safety of the many outweigh the luxury of the few?

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:42 PM
flying is a luxury anyway, if you dont want to waste the time in the airport drive, take a train or bus
A-MEN...more room on the plane for me.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:43 PM
and again: we are letting the terrorists dictate our actions. Regardless of how minor the change is, they are changing the way we do things and we shouldn't be allowing that to happen.

Funny how so many people ***** about having their civil liberties infringed on by the gov't when we use secret wiretaps and other measures to try and catch terrorists but they are the ones who ***** the loudest and demand we find a way to stop the terrorists when they can't carry a tube of toothpaste on an airplane. Un-freaking-real! :shakeno:

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:43 PM
Do you know how ridiculous this logic sounds when you put it in other contexts?

"No one can bring toothpaste on planes because someone, somewhere might try to hide explosives in a toothpaste tube."

Apply it to driving:

"No one can consume alcohol in a building with a parking lot because someone might leave and drive drunk".

Or the Internet:

"No one can use Myspace anymore because pedophiles and rapists use it to meet their victims".

In those cases, does the safety of the many outweigh the luxury of the few?
Op---take a walk and go outside...like AWM said you are going way out there...nobody should drink and drive but how many can you kill that way??...and myspace?? pfft...more people looking to shower themselves with attention...the time they spend on making their website they could actually meet real people and get the sex they are looking for.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:43 PM
Sure, that's it, just snap your fingers and "build it into" an X-ray machine. Never mind that the machine they use to sniff for explosives is quite large and complex. We'll just slap it on the nearest X-ray machine so everybody can be happy.

Op, you're losing any rational thought, give it up buddy.

well, being that I'm not an FAA employee, I have never seen one of these sniffer machines and you conveniently left out the size portion of it.

But why can't they reduce the size? Almost every electronic device has been reduced in size in recent years.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:45 PM
Do you know how ridiculous this logic sounds when you put it in other contexts?

"No one can bring toothpaste on planes because someone, somewhere might try to hide explosives in a toothpaste tube."

Apply it to driving:

"No one can consume alcohol in a building with a parking lot because someone might leave and drive drunk".

Or the Internet:

"No one can use Myspace anymore because pedophiles and rapists use it to meet their victims".

In those cases, does the safety of the many outweigh the luxury of the few?


Last time I checked, people weren't flying Myspace into buildings or blowing it up killing hundreds at a pop and causing BILLIONS in economic losses.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:45 PM
Op---take a walk and go outside...like AWM said you are going way out there...nobody should drink and drive but how many can you kill that way??...and myspace?? pfft...more people looking to shower themselves with attention...the time they spend on making their website they could actually meet real people and get the sex they are looking for.

and how many people can you kill by blowing up an airplane? 300? 400? You can kill way more than that with a fertilizer bomb- should be ban fertilizer and make the farmers go back to 17th century techniques? The safety of the many outweighs the needs of the few farmers who use the stuff legitimately.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:45 PM
so frikkin' what?? boo frikkin hoo....you can't carry your toiletries on a plane...it is a plane ride for crying out loud...read a book, a newspaper or take a nap...why do people think that the inside of the plane is equivalent to their bedroom?? almost all plane flights (save the ones AWM take) are less than three hours...can't American's make it without putting on make up, sucking down a Starbucks or yacking on the phone for three frikkin' hours? Pathetic.
WTF is your problem? For your information, I DO read books on planes. I don't drink coffee or talk on the phone. But to be denied water because it's "dangerous" is absurd! And, it has nothing to do with making a plane my bedroom, it has to do with CONVENIENCE! I don't check my bags. I rarely do. I find it a HUGE hassle to deal with baggage claim. I've waited over 45 minutes for my bags during one flight. And for a less than 3 hour flight, that's an absurd waste of my time. People fly because it's supposed to be FAST AND EASY! Not to mention, I've seen the way bags are treated by the handlers. They are thrown and I've seen several EACH TIME I FLY fall off the conveyer belt onto the ground. I'm sorry if I would prefer to have MY items in MY control while I'm traveling.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:46 PM
flying is a luxury anyway, if you dont want to waste the time in the airport drive, take a train or bus

my ass.

My wife's family lives in Puerto Rico. Do you know a way to drive or take the plane there?

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:47 PM
well, being that I'm not an FAA employee, I have never seen one of these sniffer machines and you conveniently left out the size portion of it.

But why can't they reduce the size? Almost every electronic device has been reduced in size in recent years.


I don't know. I'm not the engineer that designed it for cripes sake. Call your congressman and complain that you can't carry your toothpaste on the plane and demand they make the machines smaller if it really is affecting your life so damn much.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:48 PM
and how many people can you kill by blowing up an airplane? 300? 400? You can kill way more than that with a fertilizer bomb- should be ban fertilizer and make the farmers go back to 17th century techniques? The safety of the many outweighs the needs of the few farmers who use the stuff legitimately.
no...millions depend on the food...sorry.

and I believe the number killed on 9/11 went into 4 digits...

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:49 PM
My father has traveled all over the world for over 30 years and until 9/11 has NEVER checked a bag in his life! Since that time he has had his luggage stolen, lost and misplaced. It is an inconvience.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:49 PM
WTF is your problem? For your information, I DO read books on planes. I don't drink coffee or talk on the phone. But to be denied water because it's "dangerous" is absurd! And, it has nothing to do with making a plane my bedroom, it has to do with CONVENIENCE! I don't check my bags. I rarely do. I find it a HUGE hassle to deal with baggage claim. I've waited over 45 minutes for my bags during one flight. And for a less than 3 hour flight, that's an absurd waste of my time. People fly because it's supposed to be FAST AND EASY! Not to mention, I've seen the way bags are treated by the handlers. They are thrown and I've seen several EACH TIME I FLY fall off the conveyer belt onto the ground. I'm sorry if I would prefer to have MY items in MY control while I'm traveling.
just remember...all this is controlled by the FAA...just think if airports and flights were controlled by private companies...you wouldn't be able to do squat because they would clamp down on everything faster than you could blink to prevent getting sued for even more money than they are allowed to be sued for now.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:51 PM
My father has traveled all over the world for over 30 years and until 9/11 has NEVER checked a bag in his life! Since that time he has had his luggage stolen, lost and misplaced. It is an inconvience.
val, 30 years ago people barely brought anything onto planes...have you seen the size of some of those bags these days?? nobody checks the sizes or the contents...there are some of them that you could smuggle half a drug store into...it is a little out of hand because somebody might lose their toothpaste or be inconvienced for 30 minutes...get over it.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:51 PM
Funny how so many people ***** about having their civil liberties infringed on by the gov't when we use secret wiretaps and other measures to try and catch terrorists but they are the ones who ***** the loudest and demand we find a way to stop the terrorists when they can't carry a tube of toothpaste on an airplane. Un-freaking-real! :shakeno:

un-freaking-real how otherwise rational people support knee-jerk reactions by the government that ban all of society from taking certain actions simply because a small group of people made one unsuccessful attempt to do something illicit once. The government has yet to even establish a credible tootpaste threat but theyv'e already banned it.

We have freedoms and rights in this society- the right to not be spied on by the government without probable cause and judicial oversight for one- and we shouldn't let the terrorists take that away.

Why don't we treat the CAUSES of terrorism instead of the SYMPTOMS- poverty, fundamentalism, oppression and alienation? Oh, wait- that's long-term and would take cooperation, insight and leadership. Let's just ban toothpaste instead.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:52 PM
and how many people can you kill by blowing up an airplane? 300? 400? You can kill way more than that with a fertilizer bomb- should be ban fertilizer and make the farmers go back to 17th century techniques? The safety of the many outweighs the needs of the few farmers who use the stuff legitimately.


Companies that sell large amounts of fertilizer verify that they are selling it to farmers and/or companies that have a legit reson to purchase it. The gov't has asked them to do this. How do you think those guys were busted a few months ago? They were suspicious and reported by the company that sold them the fertilizer.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:52 PM
We don't even have the luxury of locking our bags when we do send them off to be checked. Nothing is private anymore. I had one of my checked bags opened and gone through during one of my trips. Crap was unfolded and just thrown back into my bag without any care or concern. I would prefer to keep other people out of my personal items. ****ING SUE ME!

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:52 PM
no...millions depend on the food...sorry.

and I believe the number killed on 9/11 went into 4 digits...

funny. I don't remember hearing that toothpaste caused 9/11.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:52 PM
my ass.

My wife's family lives in Puerto Rico. Do you know a way to drive or take the plane there?

then its a luxury for her to live in the USA you can take a boat then

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:54 PM
We don't even have the luxury of locking our bags when we do send them off to be checked. Nothing is private anymore. I had one of my checked bags opened and gone through during one of my trips. Crap was unfolded and just thrown back into my bag without any care or concern. I would prefer to keep other people out of my personal items. ****ING SUE ME!

dont fly then, you lost that courtesy of people not going into your bags years ago. *****ing aint gonna change it

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:55 PM
funny. I don't remember hearing that toothpaste caused 9/11.
I guess we were absent the day that revelation came out.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:55 PM
then its a luxury for her to live in the USA you can take a boat then

it's a luxury for an American to live in the USA?

I don't know if there is a boat, and if it is it lives in Florida, which means it would take 2-3 days of driving and another 1-2 days on a boat to get there. Being that we have JOBS, we don't have that much time to spend getting back and forth.

So, for us, flying is only a luxury if you consider being able to see your family a luxury.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:56 PM
We don't even have the luxury of locking our bags when we do send them off to be checked. Nothing is private anymore. I had one of my checked bags opened and gone through during one of my trips. Crap was unfolded and just thrown back into my bag without any care or concern. I would prefer to keep other people out of my personal items. ****ING SUE ME!
pfft...if I owned the airlines, the airport and it was a private company and I was responsible for all those lives you have no clue the precautions I would be taking or the rules that I would enforce in order for you to travel.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 02:56 PM
it's a luxury for an American to live in the USA?

I don't know if there is a boat, and if it is it lives in Florida, which means it would take 2-3 days of driving and another 1-2 days on a boat to get there. Being that we have JOBS, we don't have that much time to spend getting back and forth.

So, for us, flying is only a luxury if you consider being able to see your family a luxury.
flying, like driving, is a priviledge...not a right.

Valerie
08-10-2006, 02:57 PM
dont fly then, you lost that courtesy of people not going into your bags years ago. *****ing aint gonna change it
I don't ***** about it, LA. I just choose after that day to never check bags again. And I haven't. But now because of the latest parinoia apparently I am not allowed to carry my bags onto a plane because my $8 conditioner may blow up the plane. Or the water I'm drinking might blow up the plane.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 02:58 PM
un-freaking-real how otherwise rational people support knee-jerk reactions by the government that ban all of society from taking certain actions simply because a small group of people made one unsuccessful attempt to do something illicit once. The government has yet to even establish a credible tootpaste threat but theyv'e already banned it.

We have freedoms and rights in this society- the right to not be spied on by the government without probable cause and judicial oversight for one- and we shouldn't let the terrorists take that away.

Why don't we treat the CAUSES of terrorism instead of the SYMPTOMS- poverty, fundamentalism, oppression and alienation? Oh, wait- that's long-term and would take cooperation, insight and leadership. Let's just ban toothpaste instead.


Sorry Op, but I think you are incredibly selfish. You're willing to risk the lives of untold people because you think you have a constitutional right to carry toothpaste on board an airplane, bonafide threats be damned.

Like you said in your other post....the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Brush your teeth before you get to the airport.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 02:58 PM
it's a luxury for an American to live in the USA?

I don't know if there is a boat, and if it is it lives in Florida, which means it would take 2-3 days of driving and another 1-2 days on a boat to get there. Being that we have JOBS, we don't have that much time to spend getting back and forth.

So, for us, flying is only a luxury if you consider being able to see your family a luxury.

she is a citizen because she chose to come here for school and for some reason she married you which made her a citizen Im not up on how Puerto Rico fits in as far as being an American citizen, but in this country living where you want, working where you want and even going to school is a luxury that our freedom provides for us

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 02:58 PM
flying, like driving, is a priviledge...not a right.

then I guess seeing family is a priviledge according to you.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:00 PM
she is a citizen because she chose to come here for school and for some reason she married you which made her a citizen Im not up on how Puerto Rico fits in as far as being an American citizen, but in this country living where you want, working where you want and even going to school is a luxury that our freedom provides for us

ok, Puerto Rico is part of the US. she has ALWAYS been an American citizen from birth. It is no more of a privilege for her to move from PR to the US than it is for you to move from Buffalo to LA.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:00 PM
I don't ***** about it, LA. I just choose after that day to never check bags again. And I haven't. But now because of the latest parinoia apparently I am not allowed to carry my bags onto a plane because my $8 conditioner may blow up the plane. Or the water I'm drinking might blow up the plane.

well Valerie welcome to world we live in, unfortunately people are more focused and scared of dieing rather than focusing on living and enjoying life

now that they have changed what you can and cant carry on its not gonna change, they have determined it a threat and since everyone is so afraid of dieing they are gonna ban it

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:01 PM
ok, Puerto Rico is part of the US. she has ALWAYS been an American citizen from birth. It is no more of a privilege for her to move from PR to the US than it is for you to move from Buffalo to LA.

well then it still is a luxury for her to live on the mainland, just as it is a luxury for me to live in L.A.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:02 PM
Sorry Op, but I think you are incredibly selfish. You're willing to risk the lives of untold people because you think you have a constitutional right to carry toothpaste on board an airplane, bonafide threats be damned.

Like you said in your other post....the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Brush your teeth before you get to the airport.

I don't agree that it's risking lives and I don't agree that it's the only way to keep people safe.

If it's such a bona fide threat, how come we've had 60+ years of commercial flight without banning toothpaste or a single toothpaste-related mishap?

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:02 PM
well then it still is a luxury for her to live on the mainland, just as it is a luxury for me to live in L.A.

It's not a luxury for Americans to live in America. It's the right of every American citizen.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:03 PM
$8? that's nuts...you got taken...

...and they serve water on the plane...BOTTLED water.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 03:03 PM
Um, maybe because nobody ever tried to blow up a plane before by smuggling in stuff that could explode in a tube of toothpaste or a jug of water???

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:04 PM
then I guess seeing family is a priviledge according to you.
no...the choice of how to get there is...

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:04 PM
when you move from where your family is part of the sacrifice is not being able to see your family when you want or in some cases need to.

It is a luxury we choose to live whereever you want to. So if they put new restrictions on travel since I chose the luxury of living in LA I have to abide by the restrictions, Im not gonna get all pissed off over something i cant change

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:04 PM
no...the choice of how to get there is...

there IS NO OTHER WAY TO GET THERE. IT'S A ****ING ISLAND.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:05 PM
It's not a luxury for Americans to live in America. It's the right of every American citizen.

our rights are a luxury, a luxury many people dont have in their own country and thats why they come here

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:05 PM
when you move from where your family is part of the sacrifice is not being able to see your family when you want or in some cases need to.

It is a luxury we choose to live whereever you want to. So if they put new restrictions on travel since I chose the luxury of living in LA I have to abide by the restrictions, Im not gonna get all pissed off over something i cant change


In a democracy the government is responsive to the people. There are ways to change it. Not easy ways, but there are ways.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:05 PM
Um, maybe because nobody ever tried to blow up a plane before by smuggling in stuff that could explode in a tube of toothpaste or a jug of water???
or maybe somebody came up with a way to make toothpaste explode...i am still shocked that people can take cell phones, laptops, i-pods and CD players on planes...it is possible to hide a remote device in there...no?

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:05 PM
there IS NO OTHER WAY TO GET THERE. IT'S A ****ING ISLAND.
the word BOAT comes to mind...

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:06 PM
our rights are a luxury, a luxury many people dont have in their own country and thats why they come here

our rights are luxuries to people in other countries, but they're rights to people who are already legally here, not luxuries.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:06 PM
our rights are luxuries to people in other countries, but they're rights to people who are already legally here, not luxuries.
your "rights" end at your front door when you venture into public and can affect the lives of others.

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 03:07 PM
Enough of these foiled terrorist plots...we need volcanoes!

Patti

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:07 PM
if you are so concerened about seeing your wifes family in PR why dont you just move there

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:07 PM
the word BOAT comes to mind...

didn't I just say this.

First, I don't think there are any commercial boats. Second, if there are they leave from Florida, which means 2-3 days of driving followed by 1-2 days on a boat. Given that we have JOBS and limited vacation time, it's not possible for us (if it even exists).

So, the options are flying or not seeing her family. Flying is only a luxury for us if seeing your family is considered a luxury.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:08 PM
if you are so concerened about seeing your wifes family in PR why dont you just move there

same reason we don't move to rochester: no jobs for people with our education and experience.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 03:09 PM
your "rights" end at your front door when you venture into public and can affect the lives of others.

well then I say no one should be allowed to drink because if they drink and drive it affects the lives of others.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:09 PM
same reason we don't move to rochester: no jobs for people with our education and experience.

so work in a different field so you can be near your family if being near your family is so important

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:09 PM
didn't I just say this.

First, I don't think there are any commercial boats. Second, if there are they leave from Florida, which means 2-3 days of driving followed by 1-2 days on a boat. Given that we have JOBS and limited vacation time, it's not possible for us (if it even exists).

So, the options are flying or not seeing her family. Flying is only a luxury for us if seeing your family is considered a luxury.
so stow your toothpaste in a bag and check it...or call ahead to Dora's family and make sure there is a store where you can buy some or that they have some on hand for you...:rolleyes:...your choice...convienence or the potential for planes dropping out of the sky.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 03:10 PM
or maybe somebody came up with a way to make toothpaste explode...i am still shocked that people can take cell phones, laptops, i-pods and CD players on planes...it is possible to hide a remote device in there...no?

Laptops and other similar devices are looked at very closely when you send them through the X-ray machine. The folks who do the screening are given training on what to look for. I've had to power up and demonstrate my laptop is a working device several times at various airports.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:10 PM
well then I say no one should be allowed to drink because if they drink and drive it affects the lives of others.
no...they can drink responsibily...why does somebody need to be ****-assed drunk in public??...again, driving is the priviledge...

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 03:11 PM
Laptops and other similar devices are looked at very closely when you send them through the X-ray machine. The folks who do the screening are given training on what to look for. I've had to power up and demonstrate my laptop is a working device several times at various airports.
yes...I have too...but those CD rom drives that you can swap out are NEVER inspected...great place to hide a detonator.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:11 PM
no...they can drink responsibily...why does somebody need to be ****-assed drunk in public??...again, driving is the priviledge...

so is drinking for that matter,

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:13 PM
So much for your KY jelly, Val!

:D

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 03:14 PM
so stow your toothpaste in a bag and check it...or call ahead to Dora's family and make sure there is a store where you can buy some or that they have some on hand for you...:rolleyes:...your choice...convienence or the potential for planes dropping out of the sky.

Well I may decide to blog about this later, but what makes anyone think it will be possible to detect most liquids and gels? Yes, coffee cups and toothpaste tubes are obvious. But "a terrorist" could hollow out part of a paperback, put a liquid or gel inside a container that looked like playing cards, stick something in the handle of a hairbrush...

That isn't even counting putting gels or liquids into Ziploc bags and taping them to your body. Those metal detectors detect metals, not liquids or gels. So what's next, strip searches? Pat-downs? That would seem to be necessary if they truly want to prevent terrorists from smuggling "liquids or gels" on board.

My suggestion: Stop hassling parents with babies, elderly people, etc. and do some good old fashioned profiling. Because I don't think we have enough time or personal to undress everyone before boarding.

Do we?

Patti

Valerie
08-10-2006, 03:16 PM
$8? that's nuts...you got taken...

...and they serve water on the plane...BOTTLED water.
I take good care of my hair being I'm one of the only natural blondes left. lol

As for the bottled water on teh plane. I've never had water on the plane but if it's like a soda or a juice, you don't get teh full bottle/can. You get a tiny plastic cup filled with ice and about a mouthful of liquid. And, not to state the obvious, but if I'm DRINKING the water, do you really think it has explosives that can be used to blow the plane up? lol

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 03:19 PM
so work in a different field so you can be near your family if being near your family is so important

Wow, if terrorism forces Op and Dora to have to change careers, I would say not only have the terrorists "won," but they've run up the score.

Patti

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:19 PM
my conditioner costs $15

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:19 PM
Until we evolve into the kind of world that Star Trek portrayed (world peace), this is just the way things are going to be.

"In the 23rd century, the accumulation of personal wealth is no longer necessary." -Data, Star Trek, First Contact

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 03:20 PM
If you were planning on killing yourself by blowing up the airplane anyway, why would it make a difference if you drank some of it? You're going to be dead either way. You forget Valerie, we aren't talking about rational people.

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:20 PM
my conditioner costs $15

I use Nexus Humectress.

32.95 a bottle.

:up:

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:20 PM
Wow, if terrorism forces Op and Dora to have to change careers, I would say not only have the terrorists "won," but they've run up the score.

Patti
has nothing to do with it, if tehy wanted to live near family they should have chosen careers where jobs are available wher their family lives, otherwise they should enjoy phone conversations because they sacrificed living near family for their careers

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:21 PM
I use Nexus Humectress.

32.95 a bottle.

:up:

you know someone ignorant is gonna call us metro or gay soon, but in my book nothing wrong with a man taking care of himself

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:23 PM
Nothing is private anymore.

Welcome to the United States of Republicans!

They're the party of smaller government...unless they get to rustle through yer undies!

:D

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 03:24 PM
has nothing to do with it, if tehy wanted to live near family they should have chosen careers where jobs are available wher their family lives, otherwise they should enjoy phone conversations because they sacrificed living near family for their careers

I think his point is that he CAN see his family by utilizing the airline industry. That is what we're talking about.

Patti

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:26 PM
I think his point is that he CAN see his family by utilizing the airline industry. That is what we're talking about.

Patti

not being able to carry on toothpaste on a plane to PR hasnt hindered that one bit

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 03:27 PM
I think his point is that he CAN see his family by utilizing the airline industry. That is what we're talking about.

Patti


Well, he CAN still see his family, he just can't bring toothpaste on as a carry on. :D

Valerie
08-10-2006, 03:30 PM
my conditioner costs $15
What do you use? I use Just for Blondes by John Freida. But I've been trying a lot of others out. I just bought a Panteen one the other day.

Stewie
08-10-2006, 03:30 PM
then I guess seeing family is a priviledge according to you.

No, choosing to live far away from them was your right.

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:31 PM
you know someone ignorant is gonna call us metro or gay soon, but in my book nothing wrong with a man taking care of himself

I don't know what's scarier:

That Eb thinks that 8 bucks is a lot for a bottle of conditioner...

Or that Val only uses 8 dollar a bottle conditioner.

Crazy.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:32 PM
I don't know what's scarier:

That Eb thinks that 8 bucks is a lot for a bottle of conditioner...

Or that Val only uses 8 dollar a bottle conditioner.

Crazy.

agreed, well then again does Eb need conditioner ??

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:32 PM
And I'm a Retrosexual, L.A.P!

:up:

Stewie
08-10-2006, 03:33 PM
I use Nexus Humectress.

32.95 a bottle.

:up:

Woman.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 03:33 PM
What do you use? I use Just for Blondes by John Freida. But I've been trying a lot of others out. I just bought a Panteen one the other day.

Paul Mitchell, I get it from the guy who cuts my hair I think thats the brand name

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 03:34 PM
I don't know what's scarier:

That Eb thinks that 8 bucks is a lot for a bottle of conditioner...

Or that Val only uses 8 dollar a bottle conditioner.

Crazy.


:lmao: You're on a roll today!!!

Historian
08-10-2006, 03:40 PM
Woman.

And what do you use? Lemme guess:

Brut...by Faberge!

:D

Discotrish
08-10-2006, 04:10 PM
Well, he CAN still see his family, he just can't bring toothpaste on as a carry on. :D

I think they're going to have to ban anything that can be used as a container. That would be most solids.

Okay, no solids, definitely no liquids...just gases are left for terrorists to exploit.

Patti

shelby
08-10-2006, 04:33 PM
i am apalled at the selfish attitudes in this thread.

Do you people understand that 10 transatlantic flights could have been BOMBED OUT OF THE :curse:ing SKY had these people not been caught and stopped?

i have no problem with airport security. They can rummage through my suitcase all they like. They can take the battery out of my cell phone. They can confiscate my hair gel if they see fit. These people are doing their job, trying to keep us alive.

i remember flying with Jack when he was 6 months old....security took a peek in his diaper. i had no problem with that.


Valerie and Op, i'm willing to bet that if you had lost someone close to you in 9/11, or the bombing in Lachorbie Scotland, etc., you would not be so vehemently opposed to the "violation" of your "constitutional right" to bring water and conditioner and toothpaste aboard an airplane.

BTW...any of y'all remember the story about 6 to 8 weeks ago of the man flying to Atlanta from Houston? His shoes were hollowed out, and he denied having a laptop in his possession when he did, indeed, have a laptop. They detained him briefly in Houston, but in the end they let him catch a later flight to Atlanta. Can you say "dry run"?

These people are not done with us, not by a long shot. You are naive to think otherwise.

shelby
08-10-2006, 04:34 PM
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/user_pics/9-1149972015.gif

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 04:36 PM
BTW...any of y'all remember the story about 6 to 8 weeks ago of the man flying to Atlanta from Houston? His shoes were hollowed out, and he denied having a laptop in his possession when he did, indeed, have a laptop. They detained him briefly in Houston, but in the end they let him catch a later flight to Atlanta. Can you say "dry run"?

These people are not done with us, not by a long shot. You are naive to think otherwise.

But according to Op, there is no threat from shoe bombs. ;)

shelby
08-10-2006, 04:37 PM
Oh. How silly and naive of me.
:crap:

shelby
08-10-2006, 04:38 PM
Let's risk our lives because to do otherwise is "inconvenient".

What a bunch of :bs:.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 04:39 PM
Let's risk our lives because to do otherwise is "inconvenient".

What a bunch of :bs:.

I think Meat's term of "crazyworld" is very appropriate in this case.

shelby
08-10-2006, 04:42 PM
Sometimes Meat makes perfect sense.
And that is frightening.

Historian
08-10-2006, 04:42 PM
i am apalled at the selfish attitudes in this thread.



That alone is worth the price of admission...

Historian
08-10-2006, 04:45 PM
Channel 4 just said the only exemptions are baby formula, but you must have a baby to have any, and insulin.

That's pretty fair.

There isn't enough room in airplane lavatories to wash your hair anyways.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 04:48 PM
Channel 4 just said the only exemptions are baby formula, but you must have a baby to have any, and insulin.

That's pretty fair.

There isn't enough room in airplane lavatories to wash your hair anyways.

Op is gonna blow a gasket.

Historian
08-10-2006, 04:50 PM
I wonder if they will make Cher break open his Mallow Cups, to ensure that it's actually coconut and mashmallow fluff in them, as opposed to nitro glycerine.

:hmmm:

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 04:51 PM
**** Op

Historian
08-10-2006, 04:54 PM
Oh come on Playa be honest...it's fun watching OP have a melt-down.

It's why I tune in every day.

:up:

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 04:54 PM
it is and im just trying to add a little fuel to the fire

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 04:55 PM
Oh come on Playa be honest...it's fun watching OP have a melt-down.

It's why I tune in every day.

:up:

He was in prime form today. :snicker:

Dr. Lecter
08-10-2006, 05:26 PM
Thread of the day!!!!!!

I for one am quite amused. We had:

1. Shelby go off on people in almost BT like fashion.
2. Billsology, Eb and AWM agreeing on a political topic.
3. Playa and Billsology discuss hair care.
4. Eb mentioning conditioner and not one person made the obvious comment about Eb and conditioner.
5. Op acting like Op.
6. Valerie almost getting upset and angry (And I thought she was the only person here who was always nice!).
7. Billsology admiting to using $33 conditioner. That, coupled with his admiration of Manilow, tells us all we need to know.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 05:28 PM
I take good care of my hair being I'm one of the only natural blondes left. lol

As for the bottled water on teh plane. I've never had water on the plane but if it's like a soda or a juice, you don't get teh full bottle/can. You get a tiny plastic cup filled with ice and about a mouthful of liquid. And, not to state the obvious, but if I'm DRINKING the water, do you really think it has explosives that can be used to blow the plane up? lol
I have never had trouble getting a whole bottle of water....

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 05:30 PM
I don't know what's scarier:

That Eb thinks that 8 bucks is a lot for a bottle of conditioner...

Or that Val only uses 8 dollar a bottle conditioner.

Crazy.
pfft....a $2.00 bottle of shampoo lasts me months...bald helps a conservative be!!

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 05:32 PM
Sometimes Meat makes perfect sense.
And that is frightening.
and AWM and I agree...how crazy is that??

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 05:42 PM
maybe this means Op's *****ing can bring the world together and bring world peace

shelby
08-10-2006, 05:43 PM
Welcome to CrazyLand!
Op is our Mother Theresa.

Dr. Lecter
08-10-2006, 05:45 PM
I bet it is not the first time today Op's been called a mother!

Cntrygal
08-10-2006, 06:01 PM
Thread of the day!!!!!!

I for one am quite amused. We had:

1. Shelby go off on people in almost BT like fashion.
2. Billsology, Eb and AWM agreeing on a political topic.
3. Playa and Billsology discuss hair care.
4. Eb mentioning conditioner and not one person made the obvious comment about Eb and conditioner.
5. Op acting like Op.
6. Valerie almost getting upset and angry (And I thought she was the only person here who was always nice!).
7. Billsology admiting to using $33 conditioner. That, coupled with his admiration of Manilow, tells us all we need to know.


:10:

shelby
08-10-2006, 06:02 PM
Shelby go off on people in almost BT like fashion.

:whatthe:

:ontome:

Dozerdog
08-10-2006, 06:06 PM
Insta-poll-

Should I read 8 pages of posts? Is it worth it? Yes or no answers only

shelby
08-10-2006, 06:07 PM
No.

L.A. Playa
08-10-2006, 06:08 PM
if you find crazy Op logic and *****ing entertaining then yes

Dozerdog
08-10-2006, 06:12 PM
if you find crazy Op logic and *****ing entertaining then yesThat's two no's.

Anyone else?

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 06:13 PM
Only if you want to read Op whining and complaining about toothpaste.

shelby
08-10-2006, 06:15 PM
No.

ArcticWildMan
08-10-2006, 06:15 PM
and AWM and I agree...how crazy is that??


Where's Patti? I'm sure there must have been a magnitude 8 earthquake somewhere. :D

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 06:17 PM
Where's Patti? I'm sure there must have been a magnitude 8 earthquake somewhere. :D
:roflmao:

Cntrygal
08-10-2006, 06:24 PM
The whole hair care issue was mildly ............:eek2: disturbing/entertaining.

Dozerdog
08-10-2006, 06:26 PM
I guess by the lukewarm response I'll pass

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 06:31 PM
no...they can drink responsibily...why does somebody need to be ****-assed drunk in public??...again, driving is the priviledge...

well, I can use toothpaste on a plane responsibly- why should I be banned from using it just because other people can't?

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 06:37 PM
so stow your toothpaste in a bag and check it...or call ahead to Dora's family and make sure there is a store where you can buy some or that they have some on hand for you...:rolleyes:...your choice...convienence or the potential for planes dropping out of the sky.

ok- you are afraid that TOOTHPASTE is going to make planes drop out of the sky. Hence, my initial comment: the terrorists have won.

Toothpaste has NEVER been banned in the past and it has NEVER resulted in planes falling out of the sky. Suddenly, now it's a problem? I guess the government has been derelict of it's duty to protect us on airlines for the last 60+ years because it allowed toothpaste on planes. That's just plain negligent.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 06:39 PM
ok- you are afraid that TOOTHPASTE is going to make planes drop out of the sky. Hence, my initial comment: the terrorists have won.

Toothpaste has NEVER been banned in the past and it has NEVER resulted in planes falling out of the sky. Suddenly, now it's a problem? I guess the government has been derelict of it's duty to protect us on airlines for the last 60+ years because it allowed toothpaste on planes. That's just plain negligent.
i am not worried about YOUR toothpaste...stop taking this so personally...i am worried about the wackos that try this crap...and terrorist threat or not too many people bring too much crap into a plane...it is NOT necessary.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 06:41 PM
has nothing to do with it, if tehy wanted to live near family they should have chosen careers where jobs are available wher their family lives, otherwise they should enjoy phone conversations because they sacrificed living near family for their careers

or maybe when we chose careers we didn't necessarily know where they would lead us geographically, or maybe we didn't care about that since we supposedly have the RIGHT to travel freely within the US as American citizens.

shelby
08-10-2006, 06:42 PM
Threads like this make me want to gouge my eyes out.:crap:

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 06:43 PM
i am not worried about YOUR toothpaste...stop taking this so personally...i am worried about the wackos that try this crap...and terrorist threat or not too many people bring too much crap into a plane...it is NOT necessary.

you're saying because some people can't be trusted to do something responsibly without hurting others, then no one should be able to do it at all.

I guess no one should be allowed to hunt because some people hunt drunk and put everyone else's lives in danger.

I guess every car should have a governor that limits it to 55 mph because some people speed and that's a hazard to everyone else on the road. Wreckless driving kills far more people than terrorists.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 06:52 PM
you're saying because some people can't be trusted to do something responsibly without hurting others, then no one should be able to do it at all.

I guess no one should be allowed to hunt because some people hunt drunk and put everyone else's lives in danger.

I guess every car should have a governor that limits it to 55 mph because some people speed and that's a hazard to everyone else on the road. Wreckless driving kills far more people than terrorists.
Op, you seem to miss my whole point or you like to keep arguing just to argue...terrorists or not there is no reason to carry all that crap onto a plane other than selfish convienence...get over it...if airports and flights were run by private business i can guarentee you that everything you wanted to take on a plane would be searched very thoroughly...you wouldn't be allowed on a plane with anything the private company didn't want you to have on a plane...and plane travel would be very very expensive to ensure it went off safely...please give it up and be thankful for what you got...yes, restrictions occur because others cannot be trusted and this is a hot bed issue right now because planes can do millions of dollars in damage and take out 1000s in a single crash if orchestrated correctly...a drunk might kill a couple of people and it happens all the time so people dont *****...in my world you get life in prison if you drunk drive and kill somebody....what you do in the friendly confines of your four walls is your choice and your freedom....what you do once you leave there is not.

shelby
08-10-2006, 06:53 PM
Op just really likes to argue.

:D

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 06:55 PM
Op just really likes to argue.

:D
no crap...dora must be driven nuts by him...:D

Historian
08-10-2006, 07:17 PM
Threads like this make me want to gouge my eyes out.:crap:

Feel free to.

hammerbillsfan
08-10-2006, 07:18 PM
I don't know what's scarier:

That Eb thinks that 8 bucks is a lot for a bottle of conditioner...

Or that Val only uses 8 dollar a bottle conditioner.

Crazy.

How's the Extra Stock?

I guess I can't fly any to you now.

OpIv37
08-10-2006, 09:50 PM
Op, you seem to miss my whole point or you like to keep arguing just to argue...terrorists or not there is no reason to carry all that crap onto a plane other than selfish convienence...get over it...if airports and flights were run by private business i can guarentee you that everything you wanted to take on a plane would be searched very thoroughly...you wouldn't be allowed on a plane with anything the private company didn't want you to have on a plane...and plane travel would be very very expensive to ensure it went off safely...please give it up and be thankful for what you got...yes, restrictions occur because others cannot be trusted and this is a hot bed issue right now because planes can do millions of dollars in damage and take out 1000s in a single crash if orchestrated correctly...a drunk might kill a couple of people and it happens all the time so people dont *****...in my world you get life in prison if you drunk drive and kill somebody....what you do in the friendly confines of your four walls is your choice and your freedom....what you do once you leave there is not.

I don't consider it "selfishly convenient" to bring toiletries on a plane. I consider it intelligent and practical. Even before 9/11 (but especially since 9/11), air travel has been unreliable at times. You never know when you're gonna be stuck on a tarmac or in an airport terminal for hours at a time and it's best to be prepared.

And even if it is "selfishly convenient" what gives the government the right to regulate that over some assinine, unlikely threat? These banned items have been allowed on airlines for years without a problem. It's not like terrorism and liquid explosives were invented yesterday. Have there been any studies about how much of this liquid explosive it would take to do damage to a plane and how easy it is to get? It seems to me that there are a lot of questions to be answered and other alternatives before a credible threat is established.

Dr. Lecter
08-10-2006, 10:02 PM
Riding an airplane is not a right. Carrying luggage on a flight is not a right. they are privleges. There is no protected right to carry stuff on an airplane. Once you leave your home and are on public transportation, your rights diminish.

I don't see the problem in the concept.

LtBillsFan66
08-10-2006, 10:03 PM
Just put the ***** crap in the check-in. Is that so ***** hard?

Dozerdog
08-10-2006, 10:12 PM
Just put the ***** crap in the check-in. Is that so ***** hard?

They should have two lines at airports- jerkoffs who want to bring crap on planes and an "express lane" in security for those with no carry ons.


Onle line will take an hour or more, the other will take minutes. I wonder how long the jerkoffs will still try to bring in toothpaste and shampoo.

LtBillsFan66
08-10-2006, 10:20 PM
They should have two lines at airports- jerkoffs who want to bring crap on planes and an "express lane" in security for those with no carry ons.


Onle line will take an hour or more, the other will take minutes. I wonder how long the jerkoffs will still try to bring in toothpaste and shampoo.
That's a great idea. They should also encourage the fast liners to taunt the jerkoffs on the slow line.

Ebenezer
08-10-2006, 10:21 PM
They should have two lines at airports- jerkoffs who want to bring crap on planes and an "express lane" in security for those with no carry ons.


Onle line will take an hour or more, the other will take minutes. I wonder how long the jerkoffs will still try to bring in toothpaste and shampoo.
the first time they miss their plane they will stop

Captain gameboy
08-10-2006, 10:53 PM
just remember...all this is controlled by the FAA...just think if airports and flights were controlled by private companies...you wouldn't be able to do squat because they would clamp down on everything faster than.......

Not true.

Flights are controlled by privae companies, called airlines.
They have their own security measures above beyond TSA, (not FAA), mandates.

Captain gameboy
08-10-2006, 11:07 PM
I don't have the time to read through this entire thread, so if the points were made, mea culpa.

A few of things that I did note though:
1. These changes are brought about by specific identified threats. It isn't a knee jerk reaction. The concept of blowing a hole in an airliner with a fluid substance has a worrisome point for years. Obviously, that is the specific threat that was uncovered in this latest bust.

2. Op, you really have strong views on things without real knowlege. The only reason Richard Reed did not blow a hole i that airplane is because he used a wet match. A lighter would have done the trick, hence the prohibition.

3. People look at this stuff all the time and follow all the latest gadgets used for such things. They are not stupid.
In fact, they are quite bright and very concerned about your life. Have some trust in them. Deal with the inconvenience while enjoying the convenience of travelling at almost 600 mph at a cost that has never kept place with inflation.

Profiling is not a dirty word.

Michael82
08-10-2006, 11:10 PM
I hate the fact that these terrorists are controlling our lives! :(

why the **** can't I take a bottle of gatorade on the plane? That's bull****! :curse:

Captain gameboy
08-10-2006, 11:14 PM
I hate the fact that these terrorists are controlling our lives! :(

why the **** can't I take a bottle of gatorade on the plane? That's bull****! :curse:

They aren't controlling your life. They are having an influence. It is that way with all who don't chose to live in community with other humans.

LtBillsFan66
08-10-2006, 11:26 PM
I hate the fact that these terrorists are controlling our lives! :(

why the **** can't I take a bottle of gatorade on the plane? That's bull****! :curse:
:rofl:

Mikey you are epitome of what's wrong with the American public.

Michael82
08-11-2006, 05:47 AM
Welcome to the United States of Republicans!

They're the party of smaller government...unless they get to rustle through yer undies!

:D
:rofl:

Michael82
08-11-2006, 05:55 AM
i am apalled at the selfish attitudes in this thread.

Do you people understand that 10 transatlantic flights could have been BOMBED OUT OF THE :curse:ing SKY had these people not been caught and stopped?

i have no problem with airport security. They can rummage through my suitcase all they like. They can take the battery out of my cell phone. They can confiscate my hair gel if they see fit. These people are doing their job, trying to keep us alive.

i remember flying with Jack when he was 6 months old....security took a peek in his diaper. i had no problem with that.


Valerie and Op, i'm willing to bet that if you had lost someone close to you in 9/11, or the bombing in Lachorbie Scotland, etc., you would not be so vehemently opposed to the "violation" of your "constitutional right" to bring water and conditioner and toothpaste aboard an airplane.

BTW...any of y'all remember the story about 6 to 8 weeks ago of the man flying to Atlanta from Houston? His shoes were hollowed out, and he denied having a laptop in his possession when he did, indeed, have a laptop. They detained him briefly in Houston, but in the end they let him catch a later flight to Atlanta. Can you say "dry run"?

These people are not done with us, not by a long shot. You are naive to think otherwise.
I think the thing that bothers people is that we have been doing this all our lives and suddenly now we are afraid of it, because they think they found someone who was going to blow up a plane with a bomb inside of a liquid. Like I said before....what's going on right now is exactly what the terrorists want. We are letting them win. Each little tiny freedom...my freedom to bring a bottle of gatorade on the plane to drink because I get thirsty and like Valerie said...they supply you with a little tiny cup of soda and a ton of ice. It doesn't do the trick. My freedom to bring a ipod, discman, walkman, cell phone, laptop or any other device that will soon get banned (just watch!). We have had these freedoms all our life and now because we get a little threat, nothing actually happens and we don't know if it ever would have....we lose them? How is that fair?

Dude
08-11-2006, 06:37 AM
I'll let the terrorists have better oral hygene if it means I won't get blown up mid-flight.

Historian
08-11-2006, 06:48 AM
The airlines have brought a lot of this crap upon themselves...purposely overbooking flights, etc...

I think they should replace flight attendants with robots. They would probably be more polite.

On a flight up from Florida one time, my wife and I booked three seats on USEless Air. (As opposed to two and holding the toddler.) My wife took the aisle, I took the window, and we put our daugher, in her car seat, in between us. The thought being, we could take turns feeding and entertaining her, thus cutting down on any disruptions to other passengers.

Flight attendant comes by, "You can't put her there."

"Where?"

"In between you like that."

"Why?"

"Because it's against the rules."

"Excuse me?"

"Because if something happens, you might be trapped."

I replied, "Listen, I'm trying to do you a favor. In between us, we can share reponsibility for keeping her fed and occupied, thereby cutting down any potential disruptions of any of the other passengers."

****Blank stare****

"And by the way, Miss....If this plane does go down, I would rather be behind her so that I can pass her off to try to ensure she survives before me."

****Rolls eyes and stomps away****

The carry-on thing has always been a pet peeve with me too. I always took a small diaper bag with child essentials, including animal crackers, and wore a knapsack with a book, a water, a pair of undies, a discman, and my keys in it....all while people were dragging on huge pieces of luggage.

RE: water. Well, if you aren't going to allow a small bottle of Zephyr Hills onboard, you had better instruct your prissy flight attendants to start passing out pre-inspected bottles (without caps ala RW Stadium, lol) as people board, because they're all going to very thirsty sitting on the runway in Atlanta, or Chicago.

I don't doubt you could squeeze nitro-glycerine into a toothpaste tube. But as long as the passenger is willing to drink a swig of water for the inspector, what's the harm with a bottle of Poland Spring?

Michael82
08-11-2006, 06:53 AM
The airlines have brought a lot of this crap upon themselves...purposely overbooking flights, etc...

I think they should replace flight attendants with robots. They would probably be more polite.

On a flight up from Florida one time, my wife and I booked three seats on USEless Air. (As opposed to two and holding the toddler.) My wife took the aisle, I took the window, and we put our daugher, in her car seat, in between us. The thought being, we could take turns feeding and entertaining her, thus cutting down on any disruptions to other passengers.

Flight attendant comes by, "You can't put her there."

"Where?"

"In between you like that."

"Why?"

"Because it's against the rules."

"Excuse me?"

"Because if something happens, you might be trapped."

I replied, "Listen, I'm trying to do you a favor. In between us, we can share reponsibility for keeping her fed and occupied, thereby cutting down any potential disruptions of any of the other passengers."

****Blank stare****

"And by the way, Miss....If this plane does go down, I would rather be behind her so that I can pass her off to try to ensure she survives before me."

****Rolls eyes and stomps away****

The carry-on thing has always been a pet peeve with me too. I always took a small diaper bag with child essentials, including animal crackers, and wore a knapsack with a book, a water, a pair of undies, a discman, and my keys in it....all while people were dragging on huge pieces of luggage.

RE: water. Well, if you aren't going to allow a small bottle of Zephyr Hills onboard, you had better instruct your prissy flight attendants to start passing out pre-inspected bottles (without caps ala RW Stadium, lol) as people board, because they're all going to very thirsty sitting on the runway in Atlanta, or Chicago.

I don't doubt you could squeeze nitro-glycerine into a toothpaste tube. But as long as the passenger is willing to drink a swig of water for the inspector, what's the harm with a bottle of Poland Spring?
Good post! With the new liquid rule. It's fine. But I want the whole can of pop instead of just a few sips. And like you said, a bottle of water would be nice too. :up:

Dude
08-11-2006, 06:59 AM
OK, I may be opening a new can of worms here, but what the hell - it's Friday...

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but is it written anywhere that airlines have to provide food and beverage? I know it's expected since it's been done for years, but they aren't obligated to give you free soft drinks and peanuts. A lot of people treat it that way, but I don't recall there ever being any kind of "Thou shalt get free stuff on airplanes" commandment or anything.

So I don't get the complaining about not getting the whole can of soda. This isn't directed at you personally, Mikey - I hear this complaint every time I fly. I just don't get it, that's all - especially when it's a short flight. Yeah, if it's a cross-country jaunt it's nice to get a full drink, but since there is no requirement that we even get a free drink, it doesn't really bother me much.

Plus, 9 times out of 10, if you ask the flight attendant nicely, he or she will bring you another drink.

Historian
08-11-2006, 07:09 AM
I have another funny one Mike.

My Dad was really ill, back in February of 1998, so I had to fly up from Florida, because we didn't know if he was going to pull through the surgery to remove his leg.

So it's just me this time, and I'm flying out of the Sarasota-Bradenton Airport. (Which, for all intents and purposes, could be called the Hooterville Airport, as it only deals with about two dozen flights a day)

I get to the screener, a cute little old lady of about 70. she Xrays my Timberland backpack, and tells me she needs to open it up.

No Prob.

She pulls out my little Panasonic DVD-TV. I had just bought it about a month before at the Best Buy near the Countryside Mall.

LADY: What's this?

ME: It's a portable DVD player.

LADY: A what?

ME: A DVD player. Press that little switch, and a tv screen pops up, and I can watch a movie on the flight.

LADY: Hmmm. Okay, what are these things? (In the small Caselogic case)

ME: Those are the movies.

LADY: Then what's this other piece of hardware in your knapsack?

ME: That's a cd player.

***blank stare***

ME: It plays music...sort of like a tape player, only with a laser that reads encoded information on the discs.

LADY: (exasperated) I gotta get to the store and check out all this newfangled stuff....oh just go!

I should write a book.

Michael82
08-11-2006, 07:11 AM
OK, I may be opening a new can of worms here, but what the hell - it's Friday...

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but is it written anywhere that airlines have to provide food and beverage? I know it's expected since it's been done for years, but they aren't obligated to give you free soft drinks and peanuts. A lot of people treat it that way, but I don't recall there ever being any kind of "Thou shalt get free stuff on airplanes" commandment or anything.

So I don't get the complaining about not getting the whole can of soda. This isn't directed at you personally, Mikey - I hear this complaint every time I fly. I just don't get it, that's all - especially when it's a short flight. Yeah, if it's a cross-country jaunt it's nice to get a full drink, but since there is no requirement that we even get a free drink, it doesn't really bother me much.

Plus, 9 times out of 10, if you ask the flight attendant nicely, he or she will bring you another drink.
no, it isn't. That's why I always bring a bottle of gatorade and a bag of combos or something. :up:

If anything, I'm upset that they got rid of the meals. I remember flying to Seattle the week before September 11th and we got a full meal to eat on our way there. It was nice. :up:

Historian
08-11-2006, 07:11 AM
You have to keep hydrated on a plane Dude.

I remember the good old days...when liquor was free.

Meathead
08-11-2006, 07:11 AM
Sometimes Meat makes perfect sense.
And that is frightening.
hey!

Michael82
08-11-2006, 07:12 AM
I have another funny one Mike.

My Dad was really ill, back in February of 1998, so I had to fly up from Florida, because we didn't know if he was going to pull through the surgery to remove his leg.

So it's just me this time, and I'm flying out of the Sarasota-Bradenton Airport. (Which, for all intents and purposes, could be called the Hooterville Airport, as it only deals with about two dozen flights a day)

I get to the screener, a cute little old lady of about 70. she Xrays my Timberland backpack, and tells me she needs to open it up.

No Prob.

She pulls out my little Panasonic DVD-TV. I had just bought it about a month before at the Best Buy near the Countryside Mall.

LADY: What's this?

ME: It's a portable DVD player.

LADY: A what?

ME: A DVD player. Press that little switch, and a tv screen pops up, and I can watch a movie on the flight.

LADY: Hmmm. Okay, what are these things? (In the small Caselogic case)

ME: Those are the movies.

LADY: Then what's this other piece of hardware in your knapsack?

ME: That's a cd player.

***blank stare***

ME: It plays music...sort of like a tape player, only with a laser that reads encoded information on the discs.

LADY: (exasperated) I gotta get to the store and check out all this newfangled stuff....oh just go!

I should write a book.
:lmao:

Michael82
08-11-2006, 07:12 AM
You have to keep hydrated on a plane Dude.

I remember the good old days...when liquor was free.
EXACTLY!

Dude
08-11-2006, 07:19 AM
You have to keep hydrated on a plane Dude.

I remember the good old days...when liquor was free.The Wright Brothers didn't have in-flight meal service. Do you hear them complaining?

I didn't think so.

Dr. Lecter
08-11-2006, 07:27 AM
I hate the fact that these terrorists are controlling our lives! :(

why the **** can't I take a bottle of gatorade on the plane? That's bull****! :curse:

Because it is their plane and not yours?

It is not a right Mikey. People do not have a right to do whatever they want to do on public transportation.

Historian
08-11-2006, 07:34 AM
The Wright Brothers didn't have in-flight meal service. Do you hear them complaining?

I didn't think so.

They also didn't have to sit on the runway in Charlotte for two hours....

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 07:44 AM
Riding an airplane is not a right. Carrying luggage on a flight is not a right. they are privleges. There is no protected right to carry stuff on an airplane. Once you leave your home and are on public transportation, your rights diminish.

I don't see the problem in the concept.

I don't have a problem with the concept either- it's the implementation. For example. I agree that no one except federal marshals should have firearms in the cabin of an aircraft for obvious reasons. There is a clear, credible threat from firearms.

But, even if they are priviledges, they shouldn't take them away unless there is a clear, credible threat and I don't think that's been established. This is a knee-jerk reaction that was done without the necessary research and investigation.

Dude
08-11-2006, 07:50 AM
It's a preventative measure. There could still be sleeper cells out there that are backups - who knows? Better to eliminate the possibility than to take the risk.

Inconvenience or death? I'll take inconvenience.

Meathead
08-11-2006, 07:55 AM
i tell you what

since we have arabs from pakistan that want to kill civilians on planes

and we have other arabs in lebanon that will put their children up to die as human shields

why not pack those lebanese civilians onto planes and let the pakistanis blow them up?

We Die For Allah Airlines

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 08:11 AM
It's a preventative measure. There could still be sleeper cells out there that are backups - who knows? Better to eliminate the possibility than to take the risk.

Inconvenience or death? I'll take inconvenience.

well the only way to eliminate any possibility is to eliminate commercial air travel altogether. As long as there are planes in the sky, the possibility of a terror attack on a plane exists.

Should we eliminate the possibility of people speeding by putting governors in cars that limit them to 55 mph? Should we eliminate the possibility of alcohol abuse by just eliminating alcohol?

All I'm saying is that the actual risk should be established before things are banned as a knee-jerk reaction. Again, terrorism and liquid explosives weren't invented yesterday and so far there hasn't been a problem. It's an extreme reaction to a situation that, while scary, did not actually lead to any deaths or injuries.

Inconvenience and death aren't the only two choices. And even if they were, who the **** are these ****ing terrorists to force us to make a choice?

LtBillsFan66
08-11-2006, 08:13 AM
I think the thing that bothers people is that we have been doing this all our lives and suddenly now we are afraid of it, because they think they found someone who was going to blow up a plane with a bomb inside of a liquid. Like I said before....what's going on right now is exactly what the terrorists want. We are letting them win. Each little tiny freedom...my freedom to bring a bottle of gatorade on the plane to drink because I get thirsty and like Valerie said...they supply you with a little tiny cup of soda and a ton of ice. It doesn't do the trick. My freedom to bring a ipod, discman, walkman, cell phone, laptop or any other device that will soon get banned (just watch!). We have had these freedoms all our life and now because we get a little threat, nothing actually happens and we don't know if it ever would have....we lose them? How is that fair?
WOW!

Dude
08-11-2006, 08:21 AM
All I'm saying is that the actual risk should be established before things are banned as a knee-jerk reaction. Again, terrorism and liquid explosives weren't invented yesterday and so far there hasn't been a problem. It's an extreme reaction to a situation that, while scary, did not actually lead to any deaths or injuries.I think that flying planes into the WTC firmly established the risk of inadequate security measures.

You will never eliminate risk entirely. Hell, the plane could drop out of the sky due to mechanical failure. But you know what? The same people that are complaining about extreme reactions, inconvenience, and flying "rights" would be the first ones to scream and yell when something did happen if the government didn't do anything to try to prevent it. I'd rather that they err on the side of caution than appease people who disagree solely for the sake of disagreeing.

Your mind is made up, and that's fine. Next time you fly, you ***** and complain when your toothpaste and Gatorade is confiscated by TSA. While you're getting examined from the inside out, the rest of us will be strolling through security.

Meathead
08-11-2006, 08:24 AM
21 of 21 airport penetration tests failed to detect bomb making components smuggled by undercover officers onto planes in recent tests

a very bushian like failure rate

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=13a218d0-a8c7-42bc-b686-4d7b1749fca6&f=00&fg=copy

LtBillsFan66
08-11-2006, 08:26 AM
21 of 21 airport penetration tests failed to detect bomb making components smuggled by undercover officers onto planes in recent tests

a very bushian like failure rate

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=13a218d0-a8c7-42bc-b686-4d7b1749fca6&f=00&fg=copy
What do you do to fix it?

Dude
08-11-2006, 08:26 AM
All the more reason to ban carry-on luggage.

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 08:27 AM
I think that flying planes into the WTC firmly established the risk of inadequate security measures.

You will never eliminate risk entirely. Hell, the plane could drop out of the sky due to mechanical failure. But you know what? The same people that are complaining about extreme reactions, inconvenience, and flying "rights" would be the first ones to scream and yell when something did happen if the government didn't do anything to try to prevent it. I'd rather that they err on the side of caution than appease people who disagree solely for the sake of disagreeing.



No, we would be screaming that the government was too busy banning Gatorade to to take care of whatever the REAL cause of the problem was.

Yes, security was inadequate before Sept 11, but last time I checked, toothpaste and Gatorade had nothing to do with 9/11.

And you're forgetting a VERY important factor. Terrorism works on the element of surprise, and after the first time, it's not a surprise. Proof of this is the plane that went down over PA. On the first 3 flights, no one on the plane fought the terrorists because no one ever dreamed that it was a suicide mission. Once word got out, the passengers fought back and brought the flight down. Within an hour after the first hijacking with boxcutters, boxcutters were no longer a serious threat because 4 terrorists armed with boxcutters are no match for 200 other passengers who are now willing to fight back. Of course, TSA banned them anyway.....

The risk prevention measure needs to be appriopriate to the threat and in this case it isn't.

Regardless of how small and insignificant the change is- regardless if it's only a "convenience" issue- the terrorists are changing how we do things and we shouldn't stand for it.

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 08:28 AM
What do you do to fix it?

better training and detection equipment.

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 08:29 AM
All the more reason to ban carry-on luggage.

and while you're at it, ban firearms, cigarettes, automobiles, power tools, alcohol and anything else that has put someone at risk. Ever.

Dude
08-11-2006, 08:34 AM
No, we would be screaming that the government was too busy banning Gatorade to to take care of whatever the REAL cause of the problem was.Wha? Liquid explosives disguised as a sports drink. How much more REAL does it get than that?

Yes, security was inadequate before Sept 11, but last time I checked, toothpaste and Gatorade had nothing to do with 9/11.But it did have to do with the recent threat, hence the ban.

And you're forgetting a VERY important factor. Terrorism works on the element of surprise, and after the first time, it's not a surprise. Proof of this is the plane that went down over PA. On the first 3 flights, no one on the plane fought the terrorists because no one ever dreamed that it was a suicide mission. Once word got out, the passengers fought back and brought the flight down. Within an hour after the first hijacking with boxcutters, boxcutters were no longer a serious threat because 4 terrorists armed with boxcutters are no match for 200 other passengers who are now willing to fight back. Of course, TSA banned them anyway..... Yes, they eliminated the risk.

The risk prevention measure needs to be appriopriate to the threat and in this case it isn't. liquid explosives = threat. Banning liquids in carryon luggage seems to be the appropriate way to prevent someone from carrying on a liquid explosive.

Regardless of how small and insignificant the change is- regardless if it's only a "convenience" issue- the terrorists are changing how we do things and we shouldn't stand for it.I agree with the principle of what you're saying, but in this case it's just not practical.

Historian
08-11-2006, 08:51 AM
I have the solution...actually, it's Kasey Kasem that has the solution:

Keep your feet on the ground...and keep reachin' for the stars!

OpIv37
08-11-2006, 08:51 AM
liquid explosives = threat. Banning liquids in carryon luggage seems to be the appropriate way to prevent someone from carrying on a liquid explosive.


this is incredibly short-sighted. What are the chances that someone will blow up your plane with liquid explosives versus, say, getting in an accident and dying on your way home from work? But no one is clamoring to ban cars.

There are plenty of things in society that pose much higher risks than liquids on airplanes, but they aren't banned.

Dozerdog
08-11-2006, 08:55 AM
No, we would be screaming that the government was too busy banning Gatorade to to take care of whatever the REAL cause of the problem was.

Yes, security was inadequate before Sept 11, but last time I checked, toothpaste and Gatorade had nothing to do with 9/11.

And you're forgetting a VERY important factor. Terrorism works on the element of surprise, and after the first time, it's not a surprise. Proof of this is the plane that went down over PA. On the first 3 flights, no one on the plane fought the terrorists because no one ever dreamed that it was a suicide mission. Once word got out, the passengers fought back and brought the flight down. Within an hour after the first hijacking with boxcutters, boxcutters were no longer a serious threat because 4 terrorists armed with boxcutters are no match for 200 other passengers who are now willing to fight back. Of course, TSA banned them anyway.....

The risk prevention measure needs to be appriopriate to the threat and in this case it isn't.

Regardless of how small and insignificant the change is- regardless if it's only a "convenience" issue- the terrorists are changing how we do things and we shouldn't stand for it.Nobody thought sneakers were a threat either until a terrorist tried to light the fuse on his Reebocks over the Atlantic in 2001.

Now everyone removes their shoes.

How about trying to stop stuff before it happens then trying to play catch up all the time?


OP- just drive everywhere. Enough whining.

Dude
08-11-2006, 08:59 AM
this is incredibly short-sighted. What are the chances that someone will blow up your plane with liquid explosives versus, say, getting in an accident and dying on your way home from work? But no one is clamoring to ban cars.

There are plenty of things in society that pose much higher risks than liquids on airplanes, but they aren't banned.
:rolleyes: The two aren't related.

Are you really that pissed off about this, or do you just like to make circular, illogical arguments? Either way, it's not going to change. Check your lip gloss in your bag and get on with life.

Historian
08-11-2006, 09:16 AM
And lets all chip in ans buy Val a bottle of Nexus for Christmas!

:up:

imbondz
08-11-2006, 09:20 AM
21 of 21 airport penetration tests failed to detect bomb making components smuggled by undercover officers onto planes in recent tests

a very bushian like failure rate

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=13a218d0-a8c7-42bc-b686-4d7b1749fca6&f=00&fg=copy

that's right, pre-Bush the rate was closer to 1% failure rate

Historian
08-11-2006, 10:06 AM
I had a Republican buddy of mine tell me the other day:

"I never thought I would long for the good ol' days of Bill Clinton."

I practically soiled myself!

:up:

Ebenezer
08-11-2006, 10:12 AM
Good post! With the new liquid rule. It's fine. But I want the whole can of pop instead of just a few sips. And like you said, a bottle of water would be nice too. :up:
I have NEVER had trouble getting a whole bottle of water or an extra glass of pop...usually I don't even drink the water; I take it with me because the hotel rooms are usually so dry and I don't feel like getting a nose bleed. Stop whining.

imbondz
08-11-2006, 10:13 AM
if Bill Clinton was president we'd still be deciding if we should invade Afghanistan

Ebenezer
08-11-2006, 10:18 AM
OP...it's not even 10AM...get over it...there is no reason for the crap that is taken into a plane...terrorist threat or not...you buy a ticket; you ride the plane...there is NO REASON TO HAVE TOOTHPASTE ON BOARD. period. It is not a singles bar. If you breath is that bad get it taken care of by an oral surgeon. Be thankful they don't make you sit there with your hands folded. Not get over it and get some air.

imbondz
08-11-2006, 10:21 AM
I think we should all have to fly naked from now on.

Historian
08-11-2006, 10:21 AM
if Bill Clinton was president we'd still be deciding if we should invade Afghanistan

That's because Bush, Cheney and all the oil companies would still be entertaining the Taliban at the Crawford Ranch.

Stewie
08-11-2006, 10:23 AM
I have another funny one Mike.

My Dad was really ill, back in February of 1998, so I had to fly up from Florida, because we didn't know if he was going to pull through the surgery to remove his leg.

So it's just me this time, and I'm flying out of the Sarasota-Bradenton Airport. (Which, for all intents and purposes, could be called the Hooterville Airport, as it only deals with about two dozen flights a day)

I get to the screener, a cute little old lady of about 70. she Xrays my Timberland backpack, and tells me she needs to open it up.

No Prob.

She pulls out my little Panasonic DVD-TV. I had just bought it about a month before at the Best Buy near the Countryside Mall.

LADY: What's this?

ME: It's a portable DVD player.

LADY: A what?

ME: A DVD player. Press that little switch, and a tv screen pops up, and I can watch a movie on the flight.

LADY: Hmmm. Okay, what are these things? (In the small Caselogic case)

ME: Those are the movies.

LADY: Then what's this other piece of hardware in your knapsack?

ME: That's a cd player.

***blank stare***

ME: It plays music...sort of like a tape player, only with a laser that reads encoded information on the discs.

LADY: (exasperated) I gotta get to the store and check out all this newfangled stuff....oh just go!

I should write a book.

Sounds like a pretty bad book :D

LtBillsFan66
08-11-2006, 10:24 AM
better training and detection equipment.
What a profound statement.

LtBillsFan66
08-11-2006, 10:29 AM
better training and detection equipment.
How about asking the public to help? Seems like a doable measure.

Historian
08-11-2006, 10:37 AM
You're hired!

ArcticWildMan
08-11-2006, 10:39 AM
Ban all carry ons if you want 100% detection. Air travel would be better for it if carry ons were eliminated anyway.

Valerie
08-11-2006, 10:44 AM
Channel 4 just said the only exemptions are baby formula, but you must have a baby to have any, and insulin.

That's pretty fair.

There isn't enough room in airplane lavatories to wash your hair anyways.
How does that seem reasonable and fair? AWM told me earlier in this thread that even though I am drinking a water, it could still be full of something to blow a plane up. What makes any of you think that terrorists won't use a baby to help conceal their actions? If you're going to ban one thing, you've got to ban EVERYTHING. NO EXCEPTIONS!

imbondz
08-11-2006, 10:45 AM
That's because Bush, Cheney and all the oil companies would still be entertaining the Taliban at the Crawford Ranch.

:rofl:

imbondz
08-11-2006, 10:48 AM
ban all carryons, and from now on, all planes will have dvd players or dvd systems where we can download any movie we want, satellite radio systems, and magazines/books online or uploaded to an airplane only web server so we can read, etc...

problem solved. also, we could talk to the strangers next to us.

imbondz
08-11-2006, 10:48 AM
How does that seem reasonable and fair? AWM told me earlier in this thread that even though I am drinking a water, it could still be full of something to blow a plane up. What makes any of you think that terrorists won't use a baby to help conceal their actions? If you're going to ban one thing, you've got to ban EVERYTHING. NO EXCEPTIONS!

from what I've heard, the mom has to taste the baby formula in front of them.

ArcticWildMan
08-11-2006, 10:56 AM
Baby formula isn't something that airport stores carry (unlike your espresso, gatoraid, toothpaste).

Valerie
08-11-2006, 10:57 AM
from what I've heard, the mom has to taste the baby formula in front of them.
And again, I go back to what AWM said, if they're going to blow up a plane, what difference does it make if they ingest the poison?

Historian
08-11-2006, 10:57 AM
How does that seem reasonable and fair? AWM told me earlier in this thread that even though I am drinking a water, it could still be full of something to blow a plane up. What makes any of you think that terrorists won't use a baby to help conceal their actions? If you're going to ban one thing, you've got to ban EVERYTHING. NO EXCEPTIONS!

It's absolutely fair!

Terrorists could be drinking something that could make them fart.

Farts can be ignited after all.

Historian
08-11-2006, 10:59 AM
also, we could talk to the strangers next to us.

Del Griffith...shower curtain ring salesman.

Damn glad to meet ya!

Historian
08-11-2006, 11:00 AM
You're right Val.

We should make them whip out the tit instead.

:up:

Discotrish
08-11-2006, 11:01 AM
I think we should all have to fly naked from now on.

This seems reasonable, BECAUSE, a terrorist who really wanted to smuggle some liquids onto the plane could use Ziploc bags and tape them to his or her body. So at a minimum we would need either strip searches or pat-downs for EVERYONE who gets on the plane, not just randomly.

Also, I guess one of the suspects was a woman with a baby (so much for my profiling idea). Obviously you could hide a bag of liquid or gel in a diaper! So off to the special changing area for the baby's strip search.

Also the extra diapers would have to be thoroughly examined because you could conceal something in the lining of those.

Not to mention anyone's Depends.

I think I'm ready to wet my pants, as I contemplate all this.

Patti

imbondz
08-11-2006, 11:04 AM
And again, I go back to what AWM said, if they're going to blow up a plane, what difference does it make if they ingest the poison?

LOL. I didn't even think of that!!

Ebenezer
08-11-2006, 11:07 AM
How does that seem reasonable and fair? AWM told me earlier in this thread that even though I am drinking a water, it could still be full of something to blow a plane up. What makes any of you think that terrorists won't use a baby to help conceal their actions? If you're going to ban one thing, you've got to ban EVERYTHING. NO EXCEPTIONS!
fine with me...I'd get off the plane 10 minutes faster.

L.A. Playa
08-11-2006, 11:09 AM
just ban babies as carry on items make them fly in the cargo bin with the animals

imbondz
08-11-2006, 11:17 AM
great idea coming up!

we could put all child molestors, and sex offenders (i.e. rapists, deviants) to work at airports doing strip searches. That way, they'll satisfy their deviant behavior, while earning a respectable wage, and keep them from further harming society. Since we refuse to lock them away forever. it's a win-win. These terrorists aren't going to win afterall.

Valerie
08-11-2006, 11:22 AM
fine with me...I'd get off the plane 10 minutes faster.
Exactly. And then you can go and spend the next hour plus getting all the stuff you had to check along with the other 500 people. Fun times.

As funny as what Patti is saying, that's the way things are heading. Once we start to become paranoid about everything pretty soon nothing will be allowed. And then, as someone else mentioned, what happens to the stuff you check? Who's to say what people won't come up with to remotely activate something in the luggage area? By continually banning things, the terrorists are just going to keep coming up with other ways to circumvent the system.

ArcticWildMan
08-11-2006, 11:29 AM
By continually banning things, the terrorists are just going to keep coming up with other ways to circumvent the system.

And hopefully we will be able to stay one step ahead of them each time. These folks aren't going to just give up. They will keep trying to find ways to kill us. I'd rather we adapt to the threats rather than just throw our hands up in the air and give up because it's an inconvenience.

Discotrish
08-11-2006, 12:06 PM
And hopefully we will be able to stay one step ahead of them each time. These folks aren't going to just give up. They will keep trying to find ways to kill us. I'd rather we adapt to the threats rather than just throw our hands up in the air and give up because it's an inconvenience.

I know with the success in foiling this terror plot, it "seems" we are one step ahead. But the way it came about gave me the distinct impression we are one step behind. The reason is that these people came under surveillance because some neighbor or acquaintance tipped off the police a while ago re: suspicious activity. So by using various means and with cooperation of other governments (including Pakistan) they were able to get a lock on what these people were up to, and move in for arrests right before they did anything.

BUT! Our current annoying system of checks is unlikely to have stopped this plot at all! Getting liquids onto a plane? What system did we have in place to prevent that? None. It seems to not have occurred to us that it's possible to cause an explosion with innocent-looking liquids and gels. (As an aside, I wrote something called "Nobody Move! I'm Armed with a Rectal Thermometer" which made the point that there's mecury in those things, so a terrorist armed with one could secrete it you-know-where).

Can't a liquid or gel be hidden in anything that's solid? Can an X-ray detect gel hidden inside a hollowed out book, hairbrush or anything else?

So we'll have to ban liquids, solids...that just leaves gases. Something just stinks about all of this!

Patti

Ebenezer
08-11-2006, 12:08 PM
Exactly. And then you can go and spend the next hour plus getting all the stuff you had to check along with the other 500 people. Fun times.

As funny as what Patti is saying, that's the way things are heading. Once we start to become paranoid about everything pretty soon nothing will be allowed. And then, as someone else mentioned, what happens to the stuff you check? Who's to say what people won't come up with to remotely activate something in the luggage area? By continually banning things, the terrorists are just going to keep coming up with other ways to circumvent the system.
Val, that is just the point...I felt this same way (too much carry on) BEFORE 9/11...people go to the lengths they do because (business travellers at least) companies now refuse to fly people in the night before, etc...a little inconvience never hurt anybody...