Originally Posted by
BamaDude
From the linked blog-
"
At LaGuardia, my wife, a seasoned traveler, dutifully presented the see-through plastic bag containing a few small bottles of the approved size containing liquid. One was seized. It contained something she valued. Pointing out that it was regulation size, she got, “It ain’t labeled, lady.”
Supposing whatever possibly dangerous substance it contained had, say, “olive oil” written on it, I inquired, then would it be O.K.?
“Yes.”"
Since when have bottles in the Kippie Bag required labels? The tsa.gov web page on Kippie Bags (
http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm) makes no mention of any such requirement.
I'm guessing that since there was no way of verifying that the container held the allowable volume of liquid, despite it's obvious size and the fact that it was in a very small bag with other items, it was at risk for random seizure... er.. voluntary surrender. Sort of like a nearly empty tube of toothpaste that obviously does not contain the original amount (over 3.4 when full) printed on the label is not allowed. Technically, allowing these sort of things through could be considered a screening "failure". Stupidity begets more stupidity, but rulz is rulz!. I used to have a toiletry travel kit that had several small refillable unlabeled plastic bottles for liquids. My guess is that there's be a pretty good "random" chance that these might now end up in the same bin with all the other potentially explosive liquids, for lack of a simple label indicating capacity when full.
