Originally Posted by
oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Frankly, I resent being required to participate in an annoying charade with every PAX ....
Spoken like one of us perps... Oops I mean pax. At least it's over quickly for us, but we do have the added pain of arbitrary, sometimes idiotic screener rule interpretations.
Originally Posted by
oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Maybe, maybe not!
My interpretation is that it will be left up to the individual screener to decide whether or not an oversized liquid poses a hazard and should be allowed past the checkpoint.
This will, of course, lead to a nightmare, as some X-ray operators will call bag checks, while others will allow the items to sail right through. PAX won't know what to expect, and I fear they'll be even more upset than they are already.
Frankly, I resent being required to participate in an annoying charade with every PAX who brings their toothpaste to the checkpoint.
"Ma'am, this item is over 3.4 ounces and thus is considered potentially dangerous .."
"You can see it's just toothpaste! There's nothing harmful in it. I should be allowed to take it through."
"Well alrighty then! Go right ahead .."
The people who give up their item without a fight are going to be awfully unhappy when they learn later that all they had to do was dispute the TSO's claim that it's dangerous, whereupon they would have been allowed to keep it.
.... Yep...I am not looking forward to it either.
Perhaps you two don't remember the <1" sole; no shoe removal rule. It was removed when the liquid nonsense was imposed, and all footwear removed rule (except the 3 dozen more equal animal exceptions to that rule) was implemented. Clearly your org. had this rule change on the shelf, and shoved it in with the "urgent" rule change as part of the initial "shock and awe" on liquids in 08/06. The apparent reason this rule change was ready to go? The grief screeners took when they insisted on removal of flip flops and non-alarming shoes with soles clearly < 1". That was a silly rule with little consequence. Arbitrarily decide on confiscation of liquids based on a screener's perception of pax need? The confrontations from that would be emotional and dramatic. I'd give it 2 weeks to reversal if it ever did see the light of day.