Empty magazines and the checkpoint
Jul 22, 2011 | 4:52 pm
#16
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
I will not ascribe motive to the OP. The question, however, was a legitimate question. I was genuinely curious as to the answer ... as I suspect were any number of silent lurkers here.
Answering a question in a public forum isn't just about the person who asked the question; it also informs (or fails to inform) everyone else watching the conversation. The attitude you display in your response colors their reactions, too ... not just that of the OP.
But now that I have my answer, I guess I'll bow out and let the petty bickering continue.
As you were, everyone.
Answering a question in a public forum isn't just about the person who asked the question; it also informs (or fails to inform) everyone else watching the conversation. The attitude you display in your response colors their reactions, too ... not just that of the OP.
But now that I have my answer, I guess I'll bow out and let the petty bickering continue.
As you were, everyone.
Jul 22, 2011 | 5:07 pm
#17
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
However, there are plenty of other people reading this (like me) who would be interested in knowing the answer for completely legitimate reasons. Your answer to the OP is also read by them ... and it would be easy for a casual reader to read your ridicule directed towards the questioner as ridicule directed to the question.
As a public speaker, I've learned this the hard way.
I am the best (indeed, perhaps, the only) judge of my own motives. I ask that no-one tell me what my motives are in participating in any such dialog. In return, I extend to them (and to you) the same courtesy.
Jul 22, 2011 | 5:21 pm
#18
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Sincerely, welcome back!And so you know, I didn't judge your motives, I simply said what you say and/or do not say reflects upon you, as well.
To quote me: "That also reflects on your comment."
But I agree, lets end this, as the OP now knows what will happen. You can have the last word, if you wish.
"Photo of a firearm improperly packaged"? Explain please anyone.
Jul 22, 2011 | 5:56 pm
#20
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,195
Of course I am assuming here that your question was legitimate and not an attempt at humor. You may also package your rubber chickens that way if you like, Im sure that the screeners will find the humor in such a package.
Jul 22, 2011 | 6:09 pm
#21
Join Date: Jan 2011
Programs: Sky Miles, Star Alliance, Marriott
Posts: 328
"Many" have been fined? I can think of many words that are less vague than "many".
So where does the money go? The money you collect from passengers when you fine them... I'm curious what happens to it. Does the TSA get to keep it, or does it go to the treasury, or what?
So where does the money go? The money you collect from passengers when you fine them... I'm curious what happens to it. Does the TSA get to keep it, or does it go to the treasury, or what?
Jul 22, 2011 | 6:11 pm
#22
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
LOL, thats where on the TSA web page a photo appears of an improperly packaged firearm. Its to give those who choose to fly with a firearm in their checked baggage an idea of how to do so without running afoul of TSA's and the FAA's regulations.
Of course I am assuming here that your question was legitimate and not an attempt at humor. You may also package your rubber chickens that way if you like, Im sure that the screeners will find the humor in such a package.
Of course I am assuming here that your question was legitimate and not an attempt at humor. You may also package your rubber chickens that way if you like, Im sure that the screeners will find the humor in such a package.
Jul 22, 2011 | 6:32 pm
#23
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: HSV
Posts: 876
Originally Posted by celticwhisper
To date, nobody has received a Terrorists Searching Americans regulatory fine.
I remember it from reading it in the USA Today back when it first happened. Either way, here's the text of the article:
Banned items in luggage bring TSA fines
By Laura Parker
USA TODAY
WASHINGTON -- When Mojdeh Rohani flew home to Boston after her wedding last fall, security screeners at Baltimore-Washington International Airport found a silver-plated cake serving set in her carry-on bag. She had forgotten that she had the utensils, which were a wedding gift.
Officials allowed her to check the bag and take a later flight. She didn't think of the incident again -- until she got a notice from the Transportation Security Agency fining her $150 for her oversight.
''I wasn't told I could get fined for this,'' Rohani says. ''There was no sign at the airport. I think $150 is a lot of money for something that wasn't intentional.''
A year ago, the TSA quietly began assessing fines against airline passengers who violate security policies. But it wasn't until this week that it issued guidelines that specify which of the thousands of passengers who turn up every day with knives, box cutters and other banned items will be fined.
''Attitude'' is listed among the ''aggravating factors'' that can result in a fine. Other criteria include the type of item, evidence of a passenger's intent and history of previous violations. Civil penalties now range from $250 to $10,000.
Passengers attempting to carry firearms on board, loaded or unloaded, face the highest civil penalties as well as possible criminal prosecution. Since February 2002, the TSA has seized more than 1,650 guns from airline passengers.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said Thursday that he was unable to disclose the number of passengers who have been fined so far because the agency's legal department computers are temporarily inaccessible. The new guidelines were posted Wednesday on the agency's Web site.
At least 800 people had been fined through last October, according to a California lawyer who spoke with TSA's chief counsel on behalf of Susan Brown Campbell, a Los Angeles attorney who was fined $150 for having a steak knife in her briefcase. Campbell, who like Rohani was stopped at BWI, says she forgot she had the knife, which she used to cut apples and cheese.
Each day, the TSA intercepts more than 15,000 prohibited items at airports across the USA. Since February 2002, TSA has confiscated more than 3 million knives and more than 57,000 incendiary devices such as fireworks, TSA Assistant Administrator Tom Blank told Congress last week.
U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the House aviation subcommittee, which oversees the TSA, questioned how the guidelines could be uniformly applied. ''Where do they draw the line if they are confiscating that many items every day,'' he says. ''Judging attitude is extraordinarily subjective. . . . Unless they felt it was intentional, then the person should be given a warning.''
DeFazio says he has arrived at airport checkpoints carrying his mustache scissors and has been allowed to mail them to himself. ''The TSA could be in trouble for not equally applying the law,'' he says. ''They didn't fine me for my mustache scissors, but they did fine someone else for a cake knife.''
Campbell initially wanted to contest the fine in a hearing before an administrative judge.
''I got a call back from an attorney at TSA. He went on to be very, very intimidating, asking if I knew . . . that the penalty could be up to $10,000,'' Campbell says. She asked for a hearing in Los Angeles; when it was scheduled for Baltimore she chose not to pursue it. But she hasn't paid the fine, and last week she got another notice from the TSA: The fine had been increased to $300.
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/2...0/5944418s.htm
By Laura Parker
USA TODAY
WASHINGTON -- When Mojdeh Rohani flew home to Boston after her wedding last fall, security screeners at Baltimore-Washington International Airport found a silver-plated cake serving set in her carry-on bag. She had forgotten that she had the utensils, which were a wedding gift.
Officials allowed her to check the bag and take a later flight. She didn't think of the incident again -- until she got a notice from the Transportation Security Agency fining her $150 for her oversight.
''I wasn't told I could get fined for this,'' Rohani says. ''There was no sign at the airport. I think $150 is a lot of money for something that wasn't intentional.''
A year ago, the TSA quietly began assessing fines against airline passengers who violate security policies. But it wasn't until this week that it issued guidelines that specify which of the thousands of passengers who turn up every day with knives, box cutters and other banned items will be fined.
''Attitude'' is listed among the ''aggravating factors'' that can result in a fine. Other criteria include the type of item, evidence of a passenger's intent and history of previous violations. Civil penalties now range from $250 to $10,000.
Passengers attempting to carry firearms on board, loaded or unloaded, face the highest civil penalties as well as possible criminal prosecution. Since February 2002, the TSA has seized more than 1,650 guns from airline passengers.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said Thursday that he was unable to disclose the number of passengers who have been fined so far because the agency's legal department computers are temporarily inaccessible. The new guidelines were posted Wednesday on the agency's Web site.
At least 800 people had been fined through last October, according to a California lawyer who spoke with TSA's chief counsel on behalf of Susan Brown Campbell, a Los Angeles attorney who was fined $150 for having a steak knife in her briefcase. Campbell, who like Rohani was stopped at BWI, says she forgot she had the knife, which she used to cut apples and cheese.
Each day, the TSA intercepts more than 15,000 prohibited items at airports across the USA. Since February 2002, TSA has confiscated more than 3 million knives and more than 57,000 incendiary devices such as fireworks, TSA Assistant Administrator Tom Blank told Congress last week.
U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the House aviation subcommittee, which oversees the TSA, questioned how the guidelines could be uniformly applied. ''Where do they draw the line if they are confiscating that many items every day,'' he says. ''Judging attitude is extraordinarily subjective. . . . Unless they felt it was intentional, then the person should be given a warning.''
DeFazio says he has arrived at airport checkpoints carrying his mustache scissors and has been allowed to mail them to himself. ''The TSA could be in trouble for not equally applying the law,'' he says. ''They didn't fine me for my mustache scissors, but they did fine someone else for a cake knife.''
Campbell initially wanted to contest the fine in a hearing before an administrative judge.
''I got a call back from an attorney at TSA. He went on to be very, very intimidating, asking if I knew . . . that the penalty could be up to $10,000,'' Campbell says. She asked for a hearing in Los Angeles; when it was scheduled for Baltimore she chose not to pursue it. But she hasn't paid the fine, and last week she got another notice from the TSA: The fine had been increased to $300.
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/2...0/5944418s.htm
Jul 22, 2011 | 7:01 pm
#24
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 175
Jul 22, 2011 | 8:40 pm
#25
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DFW
Posts: 593
Jul 23, 2011 | 11:44 am
#28
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,253
Plain and simple, firearms (which are generally prohibited from carry-on) includes both ammunition and parts. You can, however include firearms in checked luggage so long as you declare them at check-in and comply with the rules.
Intentional violations could and I stress could result in Federal criminal prosecution, civil or administrative penalties or a combination.
Intentional violations could and I stress could result in Federal criminal prosecution, civil or administrative penalties or a combination.
Jul 23, 2011 | 12:24 pm
#30
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,195
I don't work for you, sport. I didn't see you at the last management staff meeting. Your name doesn't appear on my evaluation reports. I went to someone else, not you, whenever I had a pay discrepancy issue. Nope, nothing compels me to "obey" you.
I serve the public. I swore an oath to do so faithfully and without any reservation. But that doesn't translate into the same thing you seem to think.
Wanna try again?
I serve the public. I swore an oath to do so faithfully and without any reservation. But that doesn't translate into the same thing you seem to think.
Wanna try again?