Practical Travel Safety Issues - A way to fight back against liquids

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

better yet, one with a "kip hawtley is an idiot" label. although the time to do checkin would be too much if there is a long line

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.


Why not take one of those great KHIAI pictures that have appeared since August, make 2 copies, laminate them and securely affix one to each side of the bag so that others can clearly see them as your bag goes round and round and round on the carousel.:D

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

You might be on to something here. If water bottles (also, Gatorade, Coke, Pepsi, etc.) keep getting sent through checked baggage, it's going to chap the airline folks and probably garner some publicity.^

Hmmm..... maybe "holy water" bottles?

I think someone threatened to load a suitcase full of 2-liters when all this goofiness began so that the airlines would have to deal with carrying a bunch of heavy bags full of liquids. I wonder if s/he did it... Obviously it wouldn't make the statement of a bottle going round, round, round the carousel, but it is a form of passive resistance.

I think someone threatened to load a suitcase full of 2-liters when all this goofiness began so that the airlines would have to deal with carrying a bunch of heavy bags full of liquids. I wonder if s/he did it... Obviously it wouldn't make the statement of a bottle going round, round, round the carousel, but it is a form of passive resistance.

I checked a duffel bag full of two-liters a few days before the baggie carnival was announced. (Saved a few cents too as they were quite a bit cheaper in IN than at home in MA! :) ) I intended to do this as often as possible until some lifting of the liquid restriction; I was mad at UA for its blind/idiotic support of the war on water, (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=593362) and I figured adding weight to checked baggage was a good way to punish them.

What I really wanted to do was check one of these (http://www.campingsurvival.com/5galcolwatca.html) with no bag enclosing it, but I couldn't (easily) come up with a screw-on cap that would adequately seal the container. (The valve in the standard cap is easily opened/closed with very little twisting force.)

While I haven't thought about this in a while, I am getting very annoyed with having to check boxes just so I can take wine to people as gifts, and so I might consider in addition to my padded boxes full of wine bottles checking one or two water or soda bottles with appropriate labeling for my Christmas travel.

I wonder if you could check a 15-gallon water container.....on second thought it weighs 56 kilos, so that would definitely be overweight.

I wonder if you could check a 15-gallon water container.....on second thought it weighs 56 kilos, so that would definitely be overweight.

That's why a 5-gallon container would be nearly perfect at 42 pounds of water! :)

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

Then file a claim if it doesn't show up. :D

If everyone starts chcking in one of these jugd you'll soon enough ahve a flight were one breaks, damaging an aircraft and then causing them to extend the liquid ban to also cover checked in luggage, and no boarding without peeing in public to make sure you are drained. ;)

-A

Hmmm..... maybe "holy water" bottles?
^ 2 litre bottles labeled "Holy Water". Maybe written in different languages.

You take Spiff's idea (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6303900&postcount=16) and simply substitute as many 5 gallon jugs of water as you are permitted pieces of checked luggage. Maybe even put the jug into a box, and check that.

And somehow, forget to pick them up.

Edited to add: Better yet, 50 pounds worth of 24 hour urine sample bottles (http://www.rush.edu/rml/images/24hrurcon.JPG). Preferably full, if you don't fly that often :).

Beautiful. I love it.

I'm just going to use the big (liter) bottles. But I will make sure the yellow NWA "Priority" tag gets on there too.

Am I the only person who see's this as a childish act?

Personally, this has to become one of the most stupidest idea's ever raised.

Not only could this affect liquids in luggage, but also delay and cancel flights where this is attempted.

People live day to day on their flight being available, are the people who perform these stunts willing to repay the loss of income or personal time with the family for their doings?

Even if no one actually checks a bottle of water it would be funny as hell to place a bottle with a luggage tag on the carousel just to make a point for other travelers to see.

Even if no one actually checks a bottle of water it would be funny as hell to place a bottle with a luggage tag on the carousel just to make a point for other travelers to see.

There is a requirement of minimum size, doubt the brains behind this stunt thought of that?

Do I hear one hand clapping?

Ironically enough, last week headed back from SJC to CMH, I did just that -- checked in about 30 or 40 bottles of water in my second "misc" checked bag. They were samples of spring water and new soft drinks. I could only wonder what the TSA people were thinking when that ran through the CTX machine.

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

Why?

Why?

why not? because it would take time to checkin and retreive baggage. for the answer to "why" see posts in this thread.

cheers.

People live day to day on their flight being available, are the people who perform these stunts willing to repay the loss of income or personal time with the family for their doings?

think of the children!

cheers

I have been carrying one empty plastic bottle with a label printed on it, "Kip Hawley Brain Trust Recommended Container" shrink wrapped on it.

I used a piece of acetate (overhead projector material) which I sent through the color ink-jet printer. I then used a heat-gun to shrink the sheet over the bottle.

There is a great photo of the Kipster holding a sheet with pictures of shoes, readily available via google-images, that adornes my bottle.

So far, no comment from the "security screamers".:cool:

There was a thread on here a while back (sorry, don't remember the title and am not sure how to search for it) where someone suggested the following as a protest against the ridiculous carry-on rules and the airlines' incompetent handling of checked luggage: Fill a suitcase or box with 50 pounds of trash or refuse and check it in on your next flight. Then just fail to claim it at your destination. Voila, a new way to dispose of things you've been wanting to get rid of. People replied with various suggestions and ideas of things that could be disposed of in this manner (used kitty litter was one suggestion that for some reason sticks in my mind...)

UA is complicit, so checking and not claiming on UA might be appropriate. For other airlines I think you're best taking your suitcase of trash and surrendering it to the TSA as you are screened. I can see the piles of trash now...

People live day to day on their flight being available, are the people who perform these stunts willing to repay the loss of income or personal time with the family for their doings?
Are the people who came up with ridiculous security policies, willing to repay the loss of time and convenience as well as the costs associated with said policies to the travelling public?

Personally, this has to become one of the most stupidest idea's ever raised.

Nah, can't be. The most stupidest [sic] idea's ever raised is the liquid ban itself.

There is a requirement of minimum size, doubt the brains behind this stunt thought of that?

Do I hear one hand clapping?

Someone already checked a dozen donuts onboard one time with no problems.

Someone already checked a dozen donuts onboard one time with no problems.

:confused: :confused: they had jelly centers?

:confused: :confused: they had jelly centers?

Yeah. Got a dozen jelly donuts from KrispyKreme and checked them. He said they actually made it in tact. A little smooshed, but still in tact and edible.

WN made him sign a damage waiver before checking them. :D

"I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed."

While I applaud your raging against the machine, I'm not sure how effective this will be. Confusing the front line employees won't do much given that they have 0 say on what the policies are in terms of liquids on flights.

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

I love you guys...Whenever I need a laugh to pick me up, I venture over to no man's land in TS/S:)

Thanks

Am I the only person who see's this as a childish act?
No.

I'll remember to do that next time.

I have an update everybody I will be flying from lax-stl on the 29th and will be checking in my bottle of water (maybe 2 if I can fit all my stuff in a carry-on) I will let you know how it goes.

<rage against the machine>(i guess this is my new nick name according to one of the other posters)

That's why a 5-gallon container would be nearly perfect at 42 pounds of water! :)

Everyone here knows that when I travel on my own time, on my own business, that I am no fan of the TSA. Speaking strictly for myself, I don't feel any safer on an aircraft because you couldn't bring a drink on board from outside the sterile area.

That said, checking water as a form of protest does sound rather funny, but the men and women working on the ramp will certainly be adversely affected. We have no control over the TSA or their policies, and as such, don't deserve to be saddled with the task of stacking jugs of water while kneeling in the cargo hold of an aircraft.

This job already ruins backs, shoulders, and knees at an alarming rate. Checking excess weight to spite the TSA (such as water) or to spite the airline (like people who check bags of rocks or full sandbags) is really a disservice to us.

Just my two cents...

-eastwest

Even if no one actually checks a bottle of water it would be funny as hell to place a bottle with a luggage tag on the carousel just to make a point for other travelers to see.

Personally, I like this idea. Just put a water bottle (or gallon jug, or multi-gallon jug) on the carousel with KHIAI tags and a homemade baggage tag. Preferably an empty bottle so as not to cause a security alert. It's not going to clog up the systems or get anyone hurt, but it will be visible to other travelers and will hopefully get the message across.

At the very least, it will make people smile.

Everyone here knows that when I travel on my own time, on my own business, that I am no fan of the TSA. Speaking strictly for myself, I don't feel any safer on an aircraft because you couldn't bring a drink on board from outside the sterile area.

That said, checking water as a form of protest does sound rather funny, but the men and women working on the ramp will certainly be adversely affected. We have no control over the TSA or their policies, and as such, don't deserve to be saddled with the task of stacking jugs of water while kneeling in the cargo hold of an aircraft.

This job already ruins backs, shoulders, and knees at an alarming rate. Checking excess weight to spite the TSA (such as water) or to spite the airline (like people who check bags of rocks or full sandbags) is really a disservice to us.

Just my two cents...

-eastwest

I agree that it certainly does suck for you guys. However, we need all the help we can get to stop this idiocy and if you guys start griping ...

I also do not want you guys to work harder then you have too, you guys do a great job. But we have to put this stupidity to an end and unless people from within the airlines as well as use, unite we cannot over come the stupidity giant that has been created by an over zealous "war time regime."

I had a great idea when I was coming though the airport yesterday. From now on I will be checking JUST a water bottle thought as one of my checked bags and leaving it on the carousal in my form of protest. I will keep everybody updated to my progress and I suggest as many PP as we can do the same so that these ridiculous rules get changed.

Have you tried just putting your drinks, water bottles, etc. into your pockets before going through security?

I didn't have a zip-lock bag recently (at JFK) so I just put my toothpaste and other "deadly" liquids in my pockets. I've walked through successfully doing this a few times but this time the alarm went off for some reason. (Maybe the toothpaste container...) I had a lot of time before my flight so I didn't care. The TSA screener who had to dispose of the toothpaste, deodorant and hair gel containers I had in my pockets acted very angry. His supervisor even called me a "stupid ...". I said nothing and just smiled. It was so enjoyable that I'm definitely loading my pockets up with liquids (less expensive and unneeded items though) whenever I'm early enough to do so from now on. :cool:

These TSA thugs are going to be screaming for police powers soon. Just watch.

... I just put my toothpaste and other "deadly" liquids in my pockets..... These TSA thugs are going to be screaming for police powers soon. Just watch.

I think some toothpaste tubes are really dense and trip the equipment, which in turn delights the likewise dense screeners (in the old days I think the tubes were actually lead...?).

So, great idea, and yes, police powers is next if this keeps up.

His supervisor even called me a "stupid ...".

I'd have gone Joe Pesci on the little pissant.

yes, police powers is next if this keeps up.

I don't even think it will require organized disobedience. I think they just want the powers anyway. The type people that would work for the TSA are obviously not interested in things like morality, fairness, justice, etc. They aren't even interested in airline security. They are interested solely in money (i.e. their salaries) and power. The supervisor that called me a "stupid ..." would have loved to have had the right to arrest and/or beat me for my insubordination. Besides the epithet, you could see it in his face.

I'd have gone Joe Pesci on the little pissant.

I thought about getting his badge number, but I didn't for several reasons.

For one, those that had seen their confiscation of my toiletries were already on my side, with most of them smiling or laughing at what I had tried and these bozos' extreme overreaction to it. (When the TSA goons angrily asked me why I had all these things in my pocket, I answered simply that I did not have a Zip-lock bag. A few passengers hearing this laughed.) Had I responded angrily or demanded his badge number, I likely would have brought more negative attention on myself, and others wrongly would have assumed I had done something to deserve the TSA abuse after all. By responding calmly, the people that saw it realized how stupid these two idiots looked.

Additionally, while I sympathize with the impulse behind doing so, reporting a government agent to another government agent, especially within the TSA, is probably the height of pointlessness and naivete. It would be no different, imho, than a Mafia victim reporting a Mafia agent's bad behavior to the Mafia bosses and expecting the wrong to be righted by them.

The TSA exists because of power, fear, greed, violence, coercion, and numerous other behaviors and traits rightfully labeled "evil" when done by those outside of the government. I believe the best way to weaken its power will be to creatively, but peacefully, convince enough others how totally unnecessary and counter-productive the TSA is. It will take time, but it can be done. Markets of creative people will always eventually beat government coercion.

Anyway, keep up the good fight, Spiff.

Hmm... I think I might spend the $25 or whatever it is and get a case of "Kip Hawley is an Idiot" brand bottled water to drink at airports across this great land :)

http://www.billboardbottles.com/

"They are interested solely in money..."
They make about the same as any retail worker.

I think is 'power' or the perception of such: with a gesture they can make an executive (or whatever) wait and be nearly (or actually) cavity searched just because of who they are... their crisp white shirts and embroidered badges, etc.

If challenged, they can summon a real LEO and make ANY traveler's day a total mess, and virtually with no retribution.

I think that that IS the reason so many of these folks do what they do.

If results and accountability was a criteria, most of them would be back at their former jobs, if they had one.
On the other hand, some would be managing a real security operation perhaps, but these are working on it and moving fast so they can remove themselves from the abuse they deserve today, as they just count time/experience knowing there is a future way far from the TSA.

They make about the same as any retail worker.

Most of the TSA employees I've seen probably couldn't hold down (for very long) a retail job paying the same amount as TSA screeners get paid. (They apparently start at over $13/hour (http://www.jobsearch.org/seeker/jobsearch/quick?action=JobSearchViewJob&JobSearch_JobId=37090958&JobSearchType=JobSearch), fwiw.) I'm not saying that they do it because the job pays a lot. Just that it pays more than they would make anywhere else. And with the added bonus of job security they'd never find anywhere else, given their laziness and incompetence.

But I agree with you about the power thing. You can see what a rush so many of them get out of it. The power of the state to coerce innocent people to do what they don't want to do is a scary, evil thing, imho. It naturally attracts the worst human beings to want control of it.

But I agree with you about the power thing.

It is interesting that this term keeps popping up when discussing TSA employees. Currently I have a student who is a FAM, and in discussing screeners, he commented that occasionally even FAM's get grief from TSA screeners (remember, both of these positions come under the umbrella of the TSA organization). His belief was that some of them are on "power trips."

The basic qualification to be employed by TSA as a screener is a high school diploma/GED, the same as the vast majority of entry-level, service sector jobs. The training requirement is 40 hours of classroom, followed by 60 hours OJT (source: http://usgovinfo.about.com/bljobtsa.htm). Compare this to a law enforcement officer in any state who must have at least ten times the hours, both in class and field training.

We cannot begin to consider TSA screeners professionals in any sense, as they lack the necessary basic skills and education to be so classified; at best, they are technicians performing rote tasks. We who fly frequently are subjected to bizarre, contradictory policies that frequently change. When we encounter a TSA screener who ate all his Wheaties for breakfast and is going to enforce all rules "to the letter of the law," there can be friction. Better employee background screenings, coupled with more education on the behavioral aspects of the job, would go a long way in reducing conflict.

The policies are another issue entirely, but it is absolutely impossible to enforce every law 100%; the same holds true for screening policies. The "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law" are entirely different, and most TSA screeners are not equipped to differentiate.

Check-in agents :rolleyes: when you try to check bottles of water. They check it after some prodding, though. ;)

Am I the only person who see's this as a childish act?

Personally, this has to become one of the most stupidest idea's ever raised.

Not only could this affect liquids in luggage, but also delay and cancel flights where this is attempted.

People live day to day on their flight being available, are the people who perform these stunts willing to repay the loss of income or personal time with the family for their doings?

Amen to all of what you have just said!!! One thing you forgot to mention about how stupid this whole idea is, is that quite possibly one or more of these bottles could leak and ruin other passengers luggage and belongings. Do you think that idiot that checked the liquid is going to be willing to pay for repair/replace the damaged belongings? Probably not. I can almost surely bet that if one of these idiots had the luggage ruined, they would be demanding all sorts of compensation, etc. Hopefully though the airlines would be smart enough not to let some idiot check just bottles of liquids or improperly packed bottle of liquid.

Additionally, I have to wonder what so many of these posters are doing to have such horrible experiences with the TSA. Is there something about their behavior that brings on these experiences?? I have not once had a poor experience/encounter with the TSA. I show them respect and they show it right back. Most I encounter tend to be very friendly and even joke around just to make the whole experience pleasant. So just a suggestion to some of you complainers, take a look at yourselves and how you act, before continuinig to complain and belittle the TSA. And no, I do not work for the TSA or have any friends/family that do.

Gee - I routinely wrap liquor bottles in bubble wrap and pack them in my suitcase. They don't leak.

Gee - I routinely wrap liquor bottles in bubble wrap and pack them in my suitcase. They don't leak.

I hope you did not think I was refering to responsibly people like yourself that properly pack liquids. Carrying liquor in your suitcase properly wrapped has nothing to do with the stupid ideas some of these people are suggesting. Thanks though for being a responsibly traveler with your liquids.

Then what is the issue here? Checking a "plain" water bottle? Not such a good idea, (only because of the vulnerability to squish-pop) but they COULD do what I did a couple of months ago in Korea - I stood there and drained the whole bottle (it was a litre, though) and then KEPT the bottle :) did require a quick trip a few minutes later to the used water department, though

Then what is the issue here? Checking a "plain" water bottle? Not such a good idea, (only because of the vulnerability to squish-pop) but they COULD do what I did a couple of months ago in Korea - I stood there and drained the whole bottle (it was a litre, though) and then KEPT the bottle :) did require a quick trip a few minutes later to the used water department, though

The issue is these yahoos that are talking about just checking a "plain" bottle of water/liquid as their luggage. If somebody wants to check liquids, I have no problem with them doing so, as long as its probably packed and protected.

"I didn't have a zip-lock bag recently (at JFK) so I just put my toothpaste and other "deadly" liquids in my pockets. I've walked through successfully doing this a few times but this time the alarm went off for some reason. (Maybe the toothpaste container...) I had a lot of time before my flight so I didn't care. The TSA screener who had to dispose of the toothpaste, deodorant and hair gel containers I had in my pockets acted very angry. His supervisor even called me a "stupid ...". I said nothing and just smiled. It was so enjoyable that I'm definitely loading my pockets up with liquids (less expensive and unneeded items though) whenever I'm early enough to do so from now on. "

I'm inclined to agree with the supervisors assessment and would if you did this childish act again. Thanks, on behalf of plenty of people who have somewhere to go and things to do with their lives, for slowing down the security process. Perhaps you could think of someone other than yourself next time.

"I didn't have a zip-lock bag recently (at JFK) so I just put my toothpaste and other "deadly" liquids in my pockets. I've walked through successfully doing this a few times but this time the alarm went off for some reason. (Maybe the toothpaste container...) I had a lot of time before my flight so I didn't care. The TSA screener who had to dispose of the toothpaste, deodorant and hair gel containers I had in my pockets acted very angry. His supervisor even called me a "stupid ...". I said nothing and just smiled. It was so enjoyable that I'm definitely loading my pockets up with liquids (less expensive and unneeded items though) whenever I'm early enough to do so from now on. "

I'm inclined to agree with the supervisors assessment and would if you did this childish act again. Thanks, on behalf of plenty of people who have somewhere to go and things to do with their lives, for slowing down the security process. Perhaps you could think of someone other than yourself next time.

Thank you for supporting no accountability and immunity. You must have worked for the government before as your name implied. Whether or not you agree with taking "contraband" thru security, there is absolutely NO reason to call someone a stupid ... to their face. If that had happened in a customer service position in the real world (not government lala land), that person would have been terminated on the spot.

But I guess it's ok with you to treat people poorly, huh? :td:

I'm inclined to agree with the supervisors assessment and would if you did this childish act again. Thanks, on behalf of plenty of people who have somewhere to go and things to do with their lives, for slowing down the security process. Perhaps you could think of someone other than yourself next time.


Thank you!!! Finally, somebody on this thread with some sense and that obviously doesnt think that government is out to get him!!

Thank you!!! Finally, somebody on this thread with some sense and that obviously doesnt think that government is out to get him!!

It's not about the government being "out to get" people :rolleyes:

It's about effective security with a $5 billion price tag. Don't you think we should get something that actually works for all the money we're throwing at it?

It's not about the government being "out to get" people :rolleyes:

It's about effective security with a $5 billion price tag. Don't you think we should get something that actually works for all the money we're throwing at it?

C'mon this is run by the government. What do you expect...a running security system?

It's not about the government being "out to get" people :rolleyes:

It's about effective security with a $5 billion price tag. Don't you think we should get something that actually works for all the money we're throwing at it?

I will agree with you that our current airport security system is not perfect and does definitely need to be fixed. However, doing childish and antagnoistic things like checking a bottle of water/liquid, etc. dont help the problem. It just makes it worse. And if you feel that "protesting" is your method of choice for affecting change, have at it but do it an adult like manner and not in a way that could possibly cause problems for or inconvience other people.

Doesnt anybody remember the old saying, "two wrongs dont make a right"??

I will agree with you that our current airport security system is not perfect and does definitely need to be fixed. However, doing childish and antagnoistic things like checking a bottle of water/liquid, etc. dont help the problem. Doesnt anybody remember the old saying, "two wrongs dont make a right"??

Well, here's where we have an issue.

TSA, has unfortunately left people with not much other choice if they want to try to make a point.

File a complaint? If you're lucky, you get a boilerplate response based on keywords that show the complaint wasn't even read properly let alone taken seriously. A lot of them end up in the garbage (several people have witnessed that here). A lot of stations will either try to intimidate you into not filing a complaint (Got ID? - violation of the Privacy Act of 1974) or won't have the forms.

Write Congress? Done that several times. Few have the guts to do anything as they're afraid their opponents will accuse them of being soft on terror, even if they agree that it is a joke.

Write the airline? Most are either afraid to speak up in case they need a future handout from the government or support this mess "wholeheartedly" as UA wrote in a letter to me.

So there isn't much left to do. Write the papers and media in an attempt to try to educate the public that what we're paying for is expensive and no more professional or effective than what he had prior to 9/11. Or do other forms of "protest" like writing on the freedom baggies, wearing KHIAA t-shirts, or checking things to get people's attention. God knows nothing else has worked.

TSA needs a drastic overhaul, as does the rest of DHS. Unfortunately, no one in Congress has the balls to call for it and it's going to take a presidency change (if we're lucky) to try to fix some of the things that are going on.

TSA needs a drastic overhaul, as does the rest of DHS. Unfortunately, no one in Congress has the balls to call for it and it's going to take a presidency change (if we're lucky) to try to fix some of the things that are going on.

Unfortunately, most departments within our government need to be overhauled in one respect or another. And if you guys want to wear tshirts, write on the baggies, etc. thats fine. You have every right do that. But as I mentioned before, anything that inconviences other passengers such as activities that can slow down a security line or checking liquids that can quite possible damage other passengers luggage/belongings or delay a flight, thats where I draw the line. Just remember that you beef is with the TSA and the federal government not with other travelers.

So what you're saying is that it's ok for TSA to slow down a line with its security practices, inconvenience people, delay flights with terminal dumps, damage/steal passenger belongings, etc, but you'll only draw the line if a fellow pax does something? Got it.

If a pax has an issue, they're generally pulled out of the line and won't affect you. So no worries there. The lines can't get any slower than they already are. You can thank TSA for that.

Checking a case of water, etc, doesn't affect you anymore than someone packing the liquid in their checked luggage. Another pax's bag could fall on yours and damage it or something. If something happens, you file a claim with the airline just as normal. I don't see this as anything different than the stuff that happens in the normal course of travel.

You're free to disagree with that.

I'm inclined to agree with the supervisors assessment and would if you did this childish act again. Thanks, on behalf of plenty of people who have somewhere to go and things to do with their lives, for slowing down the security process. Perhaps you could think of someone other than yourself next time.

I didn't "slow down the security process". The TSA did that.

Thank you!!! Finally, somebody on this thread with some sense and that obviously doesnt think that government is out to get him!!

The TSA isn't out to "get" anyone, nor has anyone here claimed that. It's simply out to hand out cash and power to unintelligent, thuggish people that would never be able to accumulate such cash and power through creativity and other non-coercive means. All in the name of increasing the power and popularity of politicians and the government agents employing these people.

Airline security could and certainly would be handled more efficiently and better by free agents in a competitive, non-coercive environment. But the TSA's purpose has absolutely nothing to do with better airline security.