First, you're tilting at windmills, here, and being oddly pedantic over phrasing. I would think that you, as a disabled person, would be more about seeing to it that disabled people like you and me stand up for ourselves, than obsessing about proving me wrong and in the process discouraging disabled people for asserting the rights that are clearly theirs.

I'd also think that you would be a bit more up-to-date on your disability law, seeing how you seem some sort of an expert on the topic. Air Carrier Act is not part of the original act, but it most certainly is its kissin' cousin.

"A Guide To Disability Law"
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/cguide.htm

http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/publi...s/disabled.htm

Carriers may not refuse transportation to people on the basis of disability. Airlines may exclude anyone from a flight if carrying the person would be inimical to the safety of the flight. If a carrier excludes a person with a disability on safety grounds, the carrier must provide a written explanation of the decision.

Airlines may not require advance notice that a person with a disability is traveling. Carriers may require up to 48 hours’ advance notice for certain accommodations that require preparation time (e.g., respirator hook-up, transportation of an electric wheelchair on an aircraft with less than 60 seats).

Other provisions concerning services and accommodations address treatment of mobility aids and assistive devices, passenger information, accommodations for persons with hearing impairments, security screening, communicable diseases and medical certificates, and service animals.

The rule applies to all U.S. air carriers providing commercial air transportation. ‘Indirect’ air carriers (e.g. charter operators) are not covered by certain provisions that concern the direct provision of air transportation services.

Under "ADA Information Services"

Air Carrier Access Act, for questions pertaining to air transportation, call Department of Transportation:
Aviation Consumer Protection Division
800-778-4838 (voice)
800-455-9880 (TTY)
Internet address
http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov
(FWIW, the Department of Transportation volleys these issues back to ADA)

http://www.adata.org/whatsada-history.aspx
Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA)
In 1986 Congress passed the Air Carriers Act which addressed the rights of people with disabilities to the use air transportation. Any individual or private entity that directly or indirectly by lease or other arrangement, engages in air transportation has obligations under the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA):

to operate in a nondiscriminatory manner...

******************
Refusing to accommodate an individual who requires a substantial amount of water that is to be drunk at his or her individual discretion as a result of a chronic illness that he or she may have is clearly discriminatory according to this act. In fact, for people like that gentleman's uncle who is unable to create his own saliva due to cancer, the TSA and airlines are basically telling him and everyone else that he is not permitted to fly simply by virtue of his medical requirements.

I may be pedantic, but it is a quality that is helpful when dealing with bureaucrats, lawyers, courts and statutes. Precision in speaking and writing is the most useful tool to achieve one's goals in that arena.

Emotionalism and inaccuracy are not, in my (of course limited) experience.

Bart, thank you for the answer, that is what I thought.
Thank you also for helping many of us out on this thread.

What happens when I fly in the US with my asthma inhaler purchased in China where I live. They don't have any perscription lables on them and I'm sure that's true of many other countries as well. Or do people from outside the US simply not get to travel with their meds? I'd think that there would be some leeway for a situation like this, but then again this is the government...

Just to confirm, satellite phones are okay in a carryon?

Deleted

That's why God made lawyers, my dear.

Someone made lawyers, but I didn't think it was God. ;) :D

No problem with it at LAX international terminal tonight.

It seems like it never occurred to the TSA that this type of situation could possibly happen. :rolleyes: :td:

It's the same in Germany in many other countries. The concept of "prescription labels" doesn't exist here. You go to the pharmacy, you surrender the prescription and you get your med, which is packaged like any OTC med. Basically, millions of foreign travellers are now at risk when travelling to, from and within the U.S., and it's especially hard for all tourists that flew into the U.S. before 8/10, as they can't bring along their essential meds on continuing flights and/or their return home. Then again, all this makes them safer, right?

By the way, no issues with my "oral medication" (prescription toothpaste) flying out of SEA today. I put it in a clear plastic zip-loc with my other medications, labels all clearly displayed and put it outside of my bag in the plastic tote with my shoes for going through x-ray.

Glad to hear about the Rx dental paste. I've got Rx rinse and you better believe I'm going to trot out all 16 oz. of it on board along with my toothbrush after meals. I refuse to play along with these sick little Kabuki moves. @:-)

The TSA is completely inept
 

I flew today on the first business trip since all of this started. In my carry-on I had:

1) A non-prescription nasal spray
2) Prescription eye drops
3) Prescription ointment
4) Prescription nasal spray

I was not asked about any of these items. If the TSA was doing its supposed "job" (and I do use the term lightly), it seems to me that they should have inspected these items to ensure that they were in fact properly labeled with prescriptions (which they were). The fact that the TSA did not do this would seem to be an indication that they were unaware such items were in my luggage. This really helps to instill confidence that they would be able to find an explosive liquid or gel.

While I do think that the new rules are absurd, I also think that if you are going to have rules (no matter how absurd) they should be uniformly applied to everyone. If this was the case, I think I would have received closer scrutiny today.

May I ask a question?
 

Could the baddies re-fill a prescription container with nasties?