Yesterday evening at BUR my girlfriend was rather steamed when she was asked to remove her jean shirt exposing a white tank underneath. I told her that it was now SOP for all travelers to remove jackets, and that her choice was to remove the shirt or be sent to secondary for wanding. Naturally, she pointed out that nobody in OAK gave her a second look on Friday when she was wearing the same shirt.

I can understand why jackets must now be removed as osama is no doubt plotting new ways of sealing plastic explosives into coats (not that this would be detected by x-rays). No doubt the new policy is the result of the recent GAO or Inspector General reports on the TSA's incompetence. But it makes little sense to have a policy that is at best inconsistently enforced. Apparently they also need to provide TSA with a crash course on what constitutes a jacket.

Actually the X-Ray can assist with detection of an explosive, not by chemical analysis but by specific image charactistics.


No, it is as result of the incident in Russia.

The incident in Russia forever confused our bureaucrats about the difference between a coat and a shirt. The aftereffects will be felt around the country this coming winter, as the wand-wielding-whatzits who man our checkpoints trudge through ice and snow wearing only thin shirts, apparently mixed up with their winter coats.

Since the tragedy in Russia, I too have lost the ability to distinguish a coat from a shirt. Some mornings I show up wearing only a pair of pants and a parka.

They are both outer garmets and if they cover another garmet and obscure the bodies natural profile, they have to be removed or screened.

So, if I am wearing a long sleeve collared shirt with an undershirt underneath it (not exactly a revolutionary style concept), I must remove the outer shirt? Even if tucked-in? Surely this cannot be the case.

Sounds like the TSA-approved outfit must be some sort of spandex J-Lo creation... Um, obscuring the body's natural profile is sort of the purpose of clothing. That's why we wear it. So we're not naked.

This is a strip-search, plain and simple. Travellers should not be forced to disrobe at checkpoints.

Last week in ABQ I had to remove my long sleeved shirt (over a tank top).
I was wearing a similar shirt and tank top on the outbound from ATL with no problem. So much for consistent enforcement.

If you wear a shirt as a coat ( over the t shirt or a top), you will be asked to remove it!

What if you decide to wear a coat in lieu of a shirt? ^

Like I said in the first post "OBSCURES THE NATURAL CONTURE OF THE BODY. Like it hangs on you, creates bulk spaces etc etc. Tucking it in would eliminate most of this issue.

So if you wear a baggy sweatshirt with nothing underneath you must take it off and go topless? If not, then why do you have to take it off if you have a t-shirt underneath? Shouldn't the logic apply either way (easy to conceal items underneath baggy sweatshirt regardless of whether another garment is under it)?

Of course, who said this was based on anything like logic?

But if not tucked-in than it must be removed?

Again, inconsistency. I wore a black shirt hanging loose over a white shirt at SEA this week, & no one asked me to remove it.

I would really like an answer to the baggy sweatshirt question - my overnite flying "costume" often consists of CX jammy bottoms and a sweatshirt - ( with no bra) - am i going to have to walk thru stark naked on top - that would be one way to clear the area

Or coat as one poster said, and it is the outer most garmet covering skin, you dont take it off, you go for additional screening.

Further evidence that our nation's air "security" is managed by people without the slightest idea what they are doing.

Stupid Americans.