I really don't understand this (TSA statements)
May 22, 2015, 9:07 am
#31
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Boston environs
Programs: AAdvantage
Posts: 559
Your point is totally right, but not needed. The point is, that you chose to do X - it's not the business of your detractors to substitute their choice for yours and to say that you could have done Y or Z. There are all sorts of things you could have done rather than what you did, and maybe if I worked through it, I could figure out something that would yield a satisfactory result.
But I don't care to do that, because the point isn't what else you could have done, and whether somebody can think of something else that you could have done that would be reasonable, the point is what you CHOSE to do. It was YOUR experience, not mine or anybody else's, and it is YOUR child, not any of ours.
The problem is that you needed to bring a supplement, the problem is that the clerks are dumb and lazy. They think they're a bulwark against terrorism, and they are therefore on constant lookout for deadly cupcakes and milk.
One approach that's supposed to work (according to the rules) is to say that the boxes are medical liquids. If the clerks follow the rules, you are supposed to be allowed to bring medical liquids in any quantity. You declare them before putting them through the x-ray, and the rules say they may be subject to extra testing, but if you happen to encounter a clerk with any intelligence at all, they will "test" no more than one.
But I don't care to do that, because the point isn't what else you could have done, and whether somebody can think of something else that you could have done that would be reasonable, the point is what you CHOSE to do. It was YOUR experience, not mine or anybody else's, and it is YOUR child, not any of ours.
The problem is that you needed to bring a supplement, the problem is that the clerks are dumb and lazy. They think they're a bulwark against terrorism, and they are therefore on constant lookout for deadly cupcakes and milk.
One approach that's supposed to work (according to the rules) is to say that the boxes are medical liquids. If the clerks follow the rules, you are supposed to be allowed to bring medical liquids in any quantity. You declare them before putting them through the x-ray, and the rules say they may be subject to extra testing, but if you happen to encounter a clerk with any intelligence at all, they will "test" no more than one.
You are very supportive.While mulling over the Fourth Amendment this morning, I found myself remembering the scene in "Bewitched" when George Washington time-travels to the Stevens' neighborhood and gets in trouble for a free assembly. I found part of it with subtitles put on:
https ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tZEWmndZq4
(omit spaces when you put it in, but I don't think we're allowed to do live video links in posts)
May 22, 2015, 9:16 am
#32
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Boston environs
Programs: AAdvantage
Posts: 559
One of my son's allergens is soy. By chance, I saw this on Slate recently, for anyone who doubts the ubiquity of that allergen:
http ://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/05/soy_in_foods_tofu_tvp_mcdonald_s_chocolate_baby_fo od_protein_bars.single.html
(Since he's also allergic to corn, it's quite the adventure to find food he can eat unless we bring it ourselves.)
And again, I do agree with @Carl_Johnson that it shouldn't even matter (!) - why can't every parent just bring snacks for his/her own kids that are convenient and reliable for that family? The government does not need to intrude at this level.
If I believed, even for an instant, that it would make us any kind of safer, that would be something to discuss.
http ://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/05/soy_in_foods_tofu_tvp_mcdonald_s_chocolate_baby_fo od_protein_bars.single.html
(Since he's also allergic to corn, it's quite the adventure to find food he can eat unless we bring it ourselves.)
And again, I do agree with @Carl_Johnson that it shouldn't even matter (!) - why can't every parent just bring snacks for his/her own kids that are convenient and reliable for that family? The government does not need to intrude at this level.
If I believed, even for an instant, that it would make us any kind of safer, that would be something to discuss.
May 22, 2015, 10:57 am
#33
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SEA
Programs: Delta TDK(or care)WIA, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,869
my 3yr old only drinks almond milk. i have been bringing sealed almond milk everywhere we fly as carry on for over 2 yrs now! We fly overseas A LOT and are on a flight somewhere at least once a month. The only place I am stopped and have to have a FULL body pat down and everything search is in the USA! makes no sense! I know travel with a 8hour fresh thermos so they can swab it.
Another Midair Explosion due to Almond Milk - 308 lives lost
!
May 22, 2015, 11:00 am
#34
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Boston environs
Programs: AAdvantage
Posts: 559
(LOL) - it occurs to me, that almonds are the only nut/peanut that DS can eat, and I wonder if there is an almond milk product without corn/soy additives because that might work for us too, @faith_w16! Thank you for the idea.
May 22, 2015, 12:15 pm
#35
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SEA
Programs: Delta TDK(or care)WIA, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,869
That's not what it should be, but it would be better.
It would be better still if clerks who deliberately failed to follow the rules were fired.
May 22, 2015, 1:47 pm
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
The rules aren't what they should be, but things would be immeasurably better if the clerks followed the rules. If the clerks followed the rules, a lot of the time or maybe most of the time, somebody like lg10 would say this is a medical liquid, the clerk would observe that it is in a sealed retail box, and it would go through unopened.
That's not what it should be, but it would be better.
It would be better still if clerks who deliberately failed to follow the rules were fired.
That's not what it should be, but it would be better.
It would be better still if clerks who deliberately failed to follow the rules were fired.
That's the rule and the rule sucks!
May 24, 2015, 10:10 am
#37
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
I do a lot of flying between ORD and BOS, and I'd say that 9 times out of 10, Logan's TSA is more "reasonable" and polite than that in Chicago.
However, yesterday I did a JetBlue trip and I had my little son with me. He has multiple allergies and has a milk supplement that comes in factory-sealed boxes. You probably know where this is going.
So, I brought with us (to declare as carryon) two boxes, which I figured would get us through the waiting, flying, waiting on the other end. (I remember the days with my older kids when you could just, you know, bring food and milk for your kids without actually having to make a federal case...but anyway.)
The first TSA person in Logan (before the screening) said, "those are fine, just show them as you go through".
So I put the milks in a separate baggie and sent them through with all of our stuff.
On the other end, the agent got really snippy. She said, "you can't bring liquids". I explained the whole story really nicely. (My son is just standing there the whole time next to me.)
She said, "Well, we can't test them because they're sealed, so you have to open each box." I said, "I thought you didn't have to do that in this case," and she said, "Well, if you want me to just swab the outsides, you have to have your whole bag searched and I'll have to pat you down too. Otherwise, you can open the boxes or surrender them here."
[Now how does this make any kind of sense? If my bag, which had already passed muster, and my body, same thing, were any threat, why not insist on checking them? Why use it as a sort of punishment for me to "get away" with bringing my kid's food?]
I really did not want to be delayed or have the enormous privacy/dignity violation in front of my son and the world, so I said fine, we'll open one and surrender one, and I said, "Sweetie, drink as much as you can because we can't get more until we're there." He seemed pretty cooperative and thirsty, so at the last minute, I asked for the other one and let her open that one as well, hoping to get some more into DS before we got on the plane.
Oh, and the checking of the unsealed milk, that was so dangerous to the world that I willingly fed it to my kid...was a magical-waving of a wand (a few inches above the straw hole that the TSA agent described as "collecting the vapors") - and I didn't even see her put a new pad on - and then a sticking of said wand into a machine that I've heard doesn't do much.
Not much to do now except post on FT and hope for some tea and sympathy.
OH - the one good thing is that DS was able to drink all of one and about a third of the other before it was old enough that I thought it might not be fresh enough. (Though carrying two opened little drinks while managing a kid and luggage was something I could have done without.)
However, yesterday I did a JetBlue trip and I had my little son with me. He has multiple allergies and has a milk supplement that comes in factory-sealed boxes. You probably know where this is going.
So, I brought with us (to declare as carryon) two boxes, which I figured would get us through the waiting, flying, waiting on the other end. (I remember the days with my older kids when you could just, you know, bring food and milk for your kids without actually having to make a federal case...but anyway.)
The first TSA person in Logan (before the screening) said, "those are fine, just show them as you go through".
So I put the milks in a separate baggie and sent them through with all of our stuff.
On the other end, the agent got really snippy. She said, "you can't bring liquids". I explained the whole story really nicely. (My son is just standing there the whole time next to me.)
She said, "Well, we can't test them because they're sealed, so you have to open each box." I said, "I thought you didn't have to do that in this case," and she said, "Well, if you want me to just swab the outsides, you have to have your whole bag searched and I'll have to pat you down too. Otherwise, you can open the boxes or surrender them here."
[Now how does this make any kind of sense? If my bag, which had already passed muster, and my body, same thing, were any threat, why not insist on checking them? Why use it as a sort of punishment for me to "get away" with bringing my kid's food?]
I really did not want to be delayed or have the enormous privacy/dignity violation in front of my son and the world, so I said fine, we'll open one and surrender one, and I said, "Sweetie, drink as much as you can because we can't get more until we're there." He seemed pretty cooperative and thirsty, so at the last minute, I asked for the other one and let her open that one as well, hoping to get some more into DS before we got on the plane.
Oh, and the checking of the unsealed milk, that was so dangerous to the world that I willingly fed it to my kid...was a magical-waving of a wand (a few inches above the straw hole that the TSA agent described as "collecting the vapors") - and I didn't even see her put a new pad on - and then a sticking of said wand into a machine that I've heard doesn't do much.
Not much to do now except post on FT and hope for some tea and sympathy.
OH - the one good thing is that DS was able to drink all of one and about a third of the other before it was old enough that I thought it might not be fresh enough. (Though carrying two opened little drinks while managing a kid and luggage was something I could have done without.)
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
May 24, 2015, 10:42 am
#38
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 2,403
This was completely irrational from my perspective. I've had more security issues at O'Hare than any other airport in the US, so it doesn't shock me that this happened in Chicago.
I don't know if this woman was trying to punish you or not. Her motives are inconsequential.
The question to ask is: "In what way did she protect your safety and the safety of others?" and "In what way did her actions potentially endanger your son?"
It seems entirely reasonable that she could have swabbed the exterior of the containers and called it a day. If you had secreted explosives inside the suspicious cartons, I would guess that you would have worn gloves, and therefore only the cartons--not you--would be contaminated.
And what if the cartons had been in checked baggage? One could easily hide explosives inside a carton or a wine bottle or something else that would never be subject to such testing.
The TSA has long claimed "screener discretion." This has a certain logic to it, but it failed miserably in this instance.
I wish we could have "TSA Court." People who have undergone absurd or intrusive treatment present their cases, and expert witnesses discuss explosives, the capabilities of ETD machines the utility of profiling, etc. I imagine that the TSA's defence would be, "Umm. Because they told us to, and I though.. umm. I have to go."
I don't know if this woman was trying to punish you or not. Her motives are inconsequential.
The question to ask is: "In what way did she protect your safety and the safety of others?" and "In what way did her actions potentially endanger your son?"
It seems entirely reasonable that she could have swabbed the exterior of the containers and called it a day. If you had secreted explosives inside the suspicious cartons, I would guess that you would have worn gloves, and therefore only the cartons--not you--would be contaminated.
And what if the cartons had been in checked baggage? One could easily hide explosives inside a carton or a wine bottle or something else that would never be subject to such testing.
The TSA has long claimed "screener discretion." This has a certain logic to it, but it failed miserably in this instance.
I wish we could have "TSA Court." People who have undergone absurd or intrusive treatment present their cases, and expert witnesses discuss explosives, the capabilities of ETD machines the utility of profiling, etc. I imagine that the TSA's defence would be, "Umm. Because they told us to, and I though.. umm. I have to go."
May 24, 2015, 1:22 pm
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
Sorry, I am out on this one. First, I can't discuss the process or procedures because they do fall under the dreaded "SSI" heading.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
Are you saying that you cannot state what the proper procedure is that should be follow when a person presents with medical liquids?
May 24, 2015, 1:32 pm
#40
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
Sorry, I am out on this one. First, I can't discuss the process or procedures because they do fall under the dreaded "SSI" heading.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
I would hazard a guess that the 'wand' was the sort used at some airports (perhaps not GSO?) to hold the swab, which is then put in a machine.
It's not like there's one 'best practices' set of equipment or procedures, and the OP was hardly in the best position to try to study the equipment (an action which might get her singled out by a BDO).
May 25, 2015, 4:53 am
#41
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
I would hazard a guess that the 'wand' was the sort used at some airports (perhaps not GSO?) to hold the swab, which is then put in a machine.
It's not like there's one 'best practices' set of equipment or procedures, and the OP was hardly in the best position to try to study the equipment (an action which might get her singled out by a BDO).
It's not like there's one 'best practices' set of equipment or procedures, and the OP was hardly in the best position to try to study the equipment (an action which might get her singled out by a BDO).
Just to make things even more interesting, the equipment can vary from airport to airport. When I worked at LAX, they had 3 different types of Xray machines and operators had to be qualified on each one in order to operate them. So, this may be a piece of equipment I have never seen or heard of - so it piques my interest.
May 25, 2015, 7:00 am
#42
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
Sorry, I am out on this one. First, I can't discuss the process or procedures because they do fall under the dreaded "SSI" heading.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
As far as the machine you say where they held a wand over the drink and put it into a machine to test - I have never heard of that type of machine. There are some screening technologies that do operate on vapor testing, but I have not seen one that has a wand that you wave over it and then stick in the machine. Sorry
Edit to add: FWIW, I have a young cousin with several extreme allergies - to the point of only have a base of 5-6 foods that can be eaten on a regular basis without some form of allergic reaction. They have not traveled through airports, but it can generate challenges for he and his parents just going to visit family members down the road! Traveling with someone that has bad allergies is harder than most know.
http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat...s-and-aerosols
We have ETD machines that operate with a swab/wand combo, but I am unaware of a liquid screening system that uses that type of setup/combo.
Just to make things even more interesting, the equipment can vary from airport to airport. When I worked at LAX, they had 3 different types of Xray machines and operators had to be qualified on each one in order to operate them. So, this may be a piece of equipment I have never seen or heard of - so it piques my interest.
We have ETD machines that operate with a swab/wand combo, but I am unaware of a liquid screening system that uses that type of setup/combo.
Just to make things even more interesting, the equipment can vary from airport to airport. When I worked at LAX, they had 3 different types of Xray machines and operators had to be qualified on each one in order to operate them. So, this may be a piece of equipment I have never seen or heard of - so it piques my interest.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/check...rink-gate.html
and this one from 2010:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/pract...ages-gate.html
Basically, at the gates, TSOs were (and maybe still are) asking people, "May I test your beverage?" and when given assent, they waved a paper test strip over the beverage. After the wave, the TSO drips a drop of liquid onto the strip from a bottle labeled "distilled water". The test is then complete.
The test strips were described as resembling the common litmus strips used to test PH levels in aquariums. No machinery was required, only the strips and the bottle of "distilled water". No wands were used to hold the strips, they were held in the TSO's bare (or gloved) hands.
After speaking to a friend who had a BS degree in chemistry (not to be confused with a degree in BS), I was informed that test strips doing what these TSOs purport to be doing, i.e. testing for specific chemicals by waving a reactive paper strip above a liquid in an open container so as to react with vapors, simply do not exist. All existing test strip technologies require physical contact with the liquid to be tested, none work on vapors.
Reports in these threads were that the vapor test strips were encountered at DEN, SLC, SEA, TUS, ORD, PWM, PHX (at the c/p, not the gate), as long ago as 2010.
May 25, 2015, 7:13 am
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat...s-and-aerosols
We have ETD machines that operate with a swab/wand combo, but I am unaware of a liquid screening system that uses that type of setup/combo.
Just to make things even more interesting, the equipment can vary from airport to airport. When I worked at LAX, they had 3 different types of Xray machines and operators had to be qualified on each one in order to operate them. So, this may be a piece of equipment I have never seen or heard of - so it piques my interest.
We have ETD machines that operate with a swab/wand combo, but I am unaware of a liquid screening system that uses that type of setup/combo.
Just to make things even more interesting, the equipment can vary from airport to airport. When I worked at LAX, they had 3 different types of Xray machines and operators had to be qualified on each one in order to operate them. So, this may be a piece of equipment I have never seen or heard of - so it piques my interest.
May 25, 2015, 7:20 am
#44
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Finding fault with that reasoning is left as an exercise for the reader.
May 25, 2015, 7:32 am
#45
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
What's even more "rediculous" is that when two adults, traveling with an infant/child requiring formula/special food, is that one of them has to be patted down, if they refuse to allow all liquid items to be tested, and it's the traveler's choice as to which one. Even the dumbest terrorist could find a work-around for that one. Heck, even a single terrorist traveling with explosives disguised as "medical liquids" can find a work-around.
Last edited by petaluma1; May 25, 2015 at 8:17 am