TSA terrorizes the homeless!
 

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/05/13..._potentia.html

Okay, TSAers, tell us what you really do with the liquids that are confiscated. This is it, right?

If this is true then it's just yet more proof that this liquids ban is pointless. :rolleyes:

This is so ridiculous I am almost at a loss for words. Who is at fault here - the TSA for enforcing a stupid set of regulations which are based on nonsense, or the general public for lapping it up and never questioning strongly enough even when faced with evidence that outs the TSA as liars?

Actually, I blame a third group - the media, who would never investigate something like this and expose it.

It's sort of stealing, isn't it? Seized items should not be allowed to go anywhere except for disposal as hazardous waste if they're too dangerous to get on the plane. Once we get into handing out pies to servicemen and toiletries to the homeless, we give the TSA an incentive to re-distribute our possessions to others in order to get credit for the charity. Then individual agents may err on the side of taking our possessions away, since after all, it's all going to a "good cause" instead of going to waste. Very bad idea. There shouldn't be any outside influences on an agent's decision to confiscate or not to confiscate. No one should be profiting from a confiscation. No one.

Again, I understand that a questionable item may have to be confiscated from time to time. However, the questionable item must be destroyed, not given out elsewhere, to prevent abuse of the program. TSA is there to provide security, not to provide pies to servicemen or shampoo to homeless guys. They should not be able to buy good-will with our goods and money. They should buy good-will through keeping hazardous items and individuals off the airplane. Period.

Sort of? If the items are truly contraband, they should either be logged as evidence or destroyed. In either case, a written accounting of what was seized and what the disposition was should be made. TSA will fall back on the Patriot Act and "implied consent." In any case, this behavior would never be tolerated in any legitimate law enforcement organization in America. This activity flies in the face of several Constitutional guarantees afforded United States citizens.

But after all, we are "at war" and many citizens are choosing an erosion of civil liberties in return for a feeling of security. :td:

Wow -- the government redistributing wealth -- How quaintly Communist...

i hope no tax deductions were issued.

I think the liquid ban is essentially a blanket ban when it could be targeted but to assist the frontline people, someone made the rule that no liquids whatsoever beyond a certain amount. Its basically the same with the shoe being x-rayed. In the past, only shoes 2 inches or so, now all shoes.

Maybe all that's required in being Hazmat-certified with the TSA is to know where to deliver the potential bombs. :rolleyes:

hmmm
 

A couple of things about this. First there is the fact that a lot of the things that are not allowed on the airplane are not considered haz mat because of the quantity. For example if you had a 5 oz container of gasoline in your bag, it would not be allowed because it is over the 3.4 oz limit but by ground rules it isnt considered a haz mat because of the amount in respect to (DOT) regulations.
The second thing is that once TSA has acquired your liquids, TSA has nothing more to do with it. The local airport takes over to decide what to do with it.

Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where they sold the "muffintops" since that's where all the flavor was, then tried to donate the remainder of the muffin to the homeless, but they didn't want it either.
Couldn't even get the "muffin-bottoms" to the dump, they didn't want it either!

Which proves yet another flaw in the process. The TSA is claiming that liquids/gels in excess of 3.4oz represents a significant danger to aviation - that any of those items could be explosives.

If that theory is to hold water, then every bottle confiscated from a customer should be treated as a potential explosive and handled accordingly - otherwise, what is the danger that Kip is protecting us from??

With respect to liquids, I often see the TSA toss it into a huge trash can setup near the checkpoints.

If these liquids are so dangerous that they cannot be brought onto an airplane, why are we tossing them into trashcans? Remember, we're still at an ORANGE alert level for aviation.

Assuming for a second the threat was real and imminent, doesn't common sense dictate that it is unsafe to dispose of potentially dangerous liquids in this manner?

For stuff that is tossed away into garbage cans (not hazmat bins), I'm sure the airport just puts into a dumpster for waste disposal. As for items that are disposed of in another manner (i.e. put into boxes at the checkpoint), with our current state of "orange" security and supposedly a high risk of a liquid bomb, isn't it negligent for the airport to be distributing such items to homeless shelters?

Looking at reality - I think it is safe to say these items are generally safe. Disposal to a homeless shelter makes good use of such items as long as these draconian BS security (er, make Ma & Pa feel good) measures are in place. However, as these items are safe enough that we could feed confiscated pies to US servicemen and distribute other items to the needy, could someone please tell me why they're being confiscated in the first place?

There is either such a high risk for liquid explosives that we're at orange and the draconian rules are in place for the safety of flyers --- OR --- there is no (or very limited) risk (other than what the government & some media outlets would like us to believe) that we should not be on orange alert, nor should we be confiscating such items.

Which one is it? Can't have it both ways. High Risk/Orange Status or an Extremely Minimal Risk?

I find this frustrating also. The TSA seems to have it both ways: potentially hazardous until confiscated, and then magically "innocuous"!

Yet another in a long line of reasons I find it increasingly difficult to take the TSA seriously, both the leaders and those who enforce such nonsense.

No real security here - just a huge expensive joke played on America.

All in all, though, its better to go to someone who can use it (the homeless) instead of just trashing it.

I agree that this does not make the liquid ban right, but at least they are doing something usefulwith the confiscated things.

I can see the headlines now - Homeless man sues TSA over loss of hand when lotion donated exploded!

Where is the logic of the TSA (rhetorical question) - it's either a risk/safety issue or it's not. Stop trying to pretend your looking out for the safety of the airline industry and then turn around and do something so ridiculous.

Nonsense. Either these things are safe, or they're not. If they're safe, don't confiscate them. If they're not, don't give them to the homeless, treat them as hazardous materials. You can't have it both ways.

All righty then let me see if I can clarify this more. I have been to training where two liquids are combined that are in themselves not considered explosive till they are combined. The liquids by themselves are a hazmat but not in a quantity that has to be disposed of as a hazmat. This is according to ground rules (DOT) whereby you have to have an amount that is over a limit before it has to be disposed of as a hazmat. Some things you need to have gallons of in order to treat them as a hazmat. So therein is the misunderstanding. You have 4 oz of a liquid and TSA doesnt know what it is. You cannot take it on the plane but it is only four ounces and doesnt qualify due to "quantity" regardless of what it is, as a hazmat. It can be put in a huge bin with no precautions and it is the airport not the TSA that decides how to dispose of those huge bins of liquids. The other interesting thing is that if it was a hazmat at its face value (like checked bags with a gallon of bleach in it or a chainsaw with a full tank of gasoline), then it is up to the airline that you are flying on to come and deal with it. TSA is not the hazmat police. TSA has a duty to inform the airline of potential FAA violations relating to hazmat that is attempting to be put on the plane.
The liquid ban probably isnt going away. Sometimes I think that someone in high places watched too many James Bond movies.

I know members of the media peruse this forum fairly frequently.

So I am directing my next comments only at them...

Why don't you people show some cajones and start investigating this stuff??? How about the No Fly List? That fiasco died after the 60 Minutes broadcast...where is the follow-up? Where is the outrage?

When are we going to see an investigation into this type of illogical behavior by the TSA?

Until we get rid of the liquid ban, which I hope is really, really soon, does it make more sense to just destroy the 'dangerous' personal hygiene supplies or give them to someone who can use them.

I agree that it is a double standard, and I want the stupid ban gone just as quickly as you do, but given the situation, I think that more good comes from giving this stuff to someone who can use it than just tossing it or going through the expense of hazmat storage / disposal. We all know that it is just security window dressing anyway.

So when you toss those confiscated liquid bottles into the trash can next to passengers lined up, they could potentially cause an explosion and injur some of those passengers? I thought TSA was for protecting us.

Field trip to a high school chemistry class?

So, since the individual containers do not qualify as a quantifiable hazmat item [my bold], they can be loaded into a "huge bin" with other non-quantifiable hazmat items [my underline]? Since, as you have mentioned in several posts, the TSA is not the "hazmat police," who makes the determination on when a quantifiable level of hazmat has been reached in these "huge bins?"

Sorry - the Hazmat-operations certified EMT part of my brain does not find this logical. Combining non-quantifiable Hazmats in a large bin leads to a more extensive Hazmat situation:

1. Multiple Hazmat components
2. Unknown total quantities
3. Potential synergistic effects of various hazmat components

If we, the traveling public, are being told that liquids are not permitted beyond a certain size due to hazmat and potential explosive use, ALL confiscated liquids MUST be treated as complete, individual hazmat exposures with commensurate hazmat mitigation efforts applied, regardless of the container presented or labeling shown on said container - remember, the TSA is not the Hazmat Police, they cannot be sure of the hazmat status of any individual item. Either that - or admit that this is unjustifiable BS of the highest order and stop the F-ing charade.

No we went out an blew up airplanes!

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Okay once again its the people on this board that insist that TSA is telling people that they cant take liquids on a plane because they may be explosive therefore they should be treated as hazmat. If they were treated as hazmat, as you well know, the cost to dispose of them would be astronomical. The purpose of the no liquid over 3.4 oz is to prevent any possible binary explosives from getting on. It is a deterrent to someone thinking about it. Remember in hazmat training that if you know that it is, or you discover that it is, then it is YOUR responsibility to properly dispose of it. Since we dont know and we are not allowed to know then it is treated as a plain liquid. ORM/D wont make it either.

God help us all.

How is it that you are not allowed to know what hazmat materials are, but you are allowed to know what illegal drugs look like?

No offense, but this is one of the most contradictory policies I've ever heard. In a nutshell, you're saying that liquids are not hazmat/explosive/dangerous at the checkpoint, but they *could* be if they got onboard an aircraft....and the determining factor is the cost of disposal?

Either they are, or they're not - they can't be treated two different ways based on where they're located in the terminal. If your agency is confiscating them as potentially dangerous and hazardous material, they should be treated as such and disposed of appropriately.

The whole "binary liquids" theory is bogus anyway outside controlled lab conditions, as many scientists and industry professionals have already demonstrated.

So five guys decide to carry full ziplocs with "binary explosives" in an assortment of little < 3 oz. bottles. They all stow their bags close to each other in the overheads and while no one is looking they consolidate to one bag.

No, you're right. It's impossible. The exclusions for baby formula and prescription drugs make it even more impossible. :rolleyes:

You contradict yourself in your own words. In one sentence, you state that it is people here screaming that the TSA treat liquids as hazmat. In the other, you plainly state that the TSA's reason for the liquid carnival is since anything over 3.4 liquid oz could be used as a component in a binary EXPLOSIVE - in discussions with several highly-qualified Hazmat Technicians, I have learned there are not very many chemical compounds that are part of a binary explosives recipe that are not themselves HAZMAT components regardless of size of item.

Your hazmat training must have been significantly different than the National Fire Academy approved Operator level (first responder...the actual Hazmat techs are trained at least to Technician level) course that I went through as part of my required training at my volunteer department. That course, which is supposed to train first responders to recognize potential hazards and their initial mitigations, maintains that if I have the remotest thought in my head that the material(s) in question may be Hazmat, I am to initiate a Hazmat response. Call the cavalry, request all the manpower and specially-trained personnel and allow them to PROPERLY and SAFELY identify the component and the APPROPRIATELY dispose of it.

The liquid carnival is not a deterrent. As others have mentioned, there is nothing in this asinine policy to prevent several people from carrying upwards of 20 oz of fluid, EACH, into the sterile area and recombining them prior to boarding an aircraft...absolutely NOTHING, zip, zero, NADA. Don't give me the standard BS of the Explosives Detectors catching it...the only time the TSA uses the damn thing is when the X-Ray tech detects an "anomaly" in their routine scans. Given the number of times they haven't said a damn thing when I have forgotten to remove my INHALER from my bag...needless to say, I still profess this is an asinine, WORTHLESS carnival that is a total mockery of even the SHADOW of security.

So do you know what these magic liquids are? Did you witness the explosion? Or were you just told by the trainer that if you mix Hawline and Chertite something bad happens?

Hey, that's classified! Don't give the terrorists any ideas. Off to the No Fly List for you!

Way to miss the point. My toiletries should go to me, the person who paid for them, not to the individual or organization of a government authority's choosing. If my items are so dangerous that they must be confiscated, they should be logged as evidence and then destroyed safely as hazardous waste at such time they are no longer needed as evidence. If you want to donate to charity, please do so with funds and property from your own pocket. I will choose to donate to the charities of my own choosing, and I will almost certainly donate something useful to the homeless (cash) rather than something useless (SK-II skin care products).

Exactly. This is theft by government edict. If the government confiscates personal property and distributes it elsewhere, depriving the owner of due process, that is a crime.

Oh, I forgot - due process went out the window on 9/11.

I'm just curious whether the epistemic consequences of this statement gobsmacks anyone else? :(

When the TSA confiscates liquid from a passenger, they must assume it is something like concentrated hydrogen peroxide, acetone or some acid (the components of the type explosive the TSA fears). Each of these are hazmats and should be treated by the TSA as such. There is no way they should believe that the liquid is innocuous, if they believe that why did they confiscate it? As for the cost, well it's for the environment!

The simplest solution to the TSA giving what they confiscate to anyone is to uncap the container before disposing of it.

I guess that Texas is more environmentally conscious than Colorado ;) :

No, you didn't. You watched video(s) of old tests executed with solid explosives.

Actually he has said otherwise, but we haven't been provided with the specifics:

Don't objects that the TSA confiscates (clippers with nail files, etc.) get sold on eBay? I saw a large article on this somewhere and then a 60 Minutes about it as well.