Jenbel

I once answered that a phone charger was property of Her Majesty's Government, not mine when asked if everything was mine (the stupid US security). Cue much running around like headless chickens that I should dare to bring some property of my employer (at the time) with me on a business trip. I had to produce said phone charger (this was in the days when all electricals had to be packed in suitcase) and it was taken off to be examined by someone expert in determining if Her Maj was attempting to smuggle something nefarious into the United States. After 10 minutes, word came down from on high that phone chargers owned by Her Majesty were appropriate to be carried on board, and I was given approval to proceed.

From that point on, the phone charger was mine. And, no-one made the connection that if the phone-charger was HM's... .what did that make the phone it charged? Given the reaction to the charger, i thought that their heads would explode if I told them the phone was also owned by HM

flatbedfan

Oh yes, let's name drop in a thread on security

Jimmie76

I was asked when checking in for a 9k flight last year Has the bag been in your posession at all times, to which I rather truthfully said No. The agent looking slightly alarmed then said alright could anyone have interfered with the bag at all, to which I truthfully replied yes - I've just stepped off a BA flight from LHR and the bag has been out of my posession since I Fast Bag Dropped at LHR.

Visibly relieved the check in agent said you do not need to worry about it if it has been in the posession of another airline. So there you go.

Jimmie76

Probably best not to mention that they 'profile' pax at LHR then.

sunrisegirl

I'm sorry but there is if they've been given written instructions that info is to be told on a "need to know" basis. If BA felt their passengers "needed" to know they would give you the full details on ba.com.


My understanding is that it is the Government who requires these questions to be answered. Perhaps you should ask them what are the penalties for giving incorrect information.

However, if somebody refuses to answer or is stubborn (ie. bloody minded!) about it, then we will call a Duty Manager to deal with it. If people continue to be difficult I have known passengers be offloaded and the police called, though this is extremely rare. Thankfully, most passengers accept the need for the questions to be asked whether they like or agree with them.

Obviously we can't do anything about those who prefer to lie to us and it's disappointing some people behave that way, but unfortunately that's the way of life.
Shame as if they were honest, all that would happen is they'd be asked to accompany a staff member to the additional x-ray facility where it would take less than 5 minutes to scan their bag.

Jenbel

Well, why not?

Is there a better time to do it?

giffordius

OT, but security related! I went through T5 last week and a lady had a bottle of Viktor & Rolf Flower Bomb perfume on top of her tray which the attendant quickly scooped up and said 'don't say the name out loud but this might not be allowed through'.

He took it off to the supervisor who allowed it through.

The lady (rather unwisely I thought) loudly expressed her sense of derision at the potential confiscation and said 'If I had anything dodgy I would hardly bring it along in a bottle shaped like a hand-grenade with the word 'bomb' written on it'.

The question - is it absurd to threaten to confiscate a perfume because it is shaped like a grenade and has 'bomb' in the name? (It seemed absurd at the time but I'm not sure whether it is or not)

limabean767

Yes; but at T5 anythings possible.

Jimmie76

Not usually a good idea to let through something that resembles a weapon as someone might mistake it as such causing delays etc.

however this



doesn't look that much like a grenade so I wouldn't have been that concerned if it were me.

Something like this however



would have me concerned if I were airport security .

sunrisegirl

In my opinion, yes it is especially when LHR and LGW both sell that perfume in their duty free shops. Still sense has never been a strong point of the airport security people.

LiviLion

WRT the three questions, I almost did say 'Yes' to the questions last week as my luggage had been left in the hire car all day at the hotel when I went to work.

I'm sure this applies to a large number of people going home on a Friday.

InfiniteCycle

I thought that these questions were to establish that you are taking responsibility for the contents of your bags. For example, if you had a kilo of cocaine in any of the bags, you have already established that:

1. You packed the bag (so put it in the bag)
2. That you have had the bag with you at all times and that no one else added anything to the bag.
3. That no one gave you anything to carry (that you can then claim isn't your responsibility).

Didn't think it was much to do with terrorism in this instance, but more an admission of guilt were anything to be in your bags.

It is similar to the question about intention to partake in terrorist activities before entering the US. I always wondered whether if you answered that was your intention you could get immunity from prosecution as you declared your intention from the beginning.

Palmer

Yes, the three questions relate to responsibility and criminal liability. The questions were brought in as a direct result of this.

Palmer

adrianjc32

Exactly, it is just a method to help speed the wait time for the majority of customers as they wait to board. All customers are still subject to random checks, no matter what is, or is not on a boarding pass. So it really is rather dull and not really worth its own thread.....

Nothing awful, there are sometimes legitimate reasons for answering "yes". If you cannot answer no to all of the questions your bags get additional screening in your presence. If you do answer "no" and an illegal item is then found in the bag as it passes through the process you get additional screening at the airport police station .....

Phil the Flyer

There's a few here who might relish the prospect of rubber gloves and Vaseline.