Originally Posted by
T-the-B
I'm sorry but I cannot allow that bit of sophistry to pass by.
- Did the "someone" who prohibited the nitro medication do so while wearing a TSA uniform?
- Was that "someone" drawing pay from TSA at the time?
- Did that "someone" do so with the authority of the TSA?
- Could the passenger have ignored that "someone" and maintained possession of the nitro medication with no repercussions from the TSA?
That "someone" was indeed acting as an agent for and on behalf of the TSA under the color of authority of that agency. To pretend that this act was done by some nebulous "someone" and not by TSA is literally incredible.
I have consistently, and firmly stated that anyone that would take nitro meds without some articulable reason that it is a part of a threat/possible threat item(s) - and that would be a stretch without serious creativity. That is not a nebulous "someone", it is any individual that would prevent a passenger from taking their nitro with them. I have heard no workable articulation thus far that would change that stance (I am open to hearing it, but I have not heard it as of this moment). I am not pretending at all, I am merely telling you, that the training indicates different, all published information indicates different, and I have repeatedly stated so in open forums. If a TSO prevents a passenger from taking nitro with them, and does not have a reasonable articulation as to why they are not allowing the passenger to take them, they are wrong, period. I can't get much clearer than that.