Word.

Where would a Dasani bottle containing hydrogen peroxide go then ? After all isn't that Kippie's "worst fear" ? :cool:

Wow are you ever sadly misinformed.

The distinction is what the label says. IF there is a flammable warning on the label it goes into a hazmat tub. End of story. Unmarked bottles or "unknowns" are just generally disposed of along with H2O, toothpaste, shampoo, etc, etc.

So the TSA trusts the labels when it suits them (i.e. makes their lives easier). Another case of "Do as I say, not as I do."

Shouldn't unknowns be considered hazardous until proven benign?

The Innocuous Bomb Terror Plot Revealed
 

"It might not be the safest way, especially mixing torch lighters and fuels,"

Well then you're off the hook. This little storage problem is not EPA's jurisdiction. It's your local fire department's jurisdiction regarding a mind boggling unsafe storage practice in a publicly owned building open to the general public where the unsafe stuff is surrounded by hundreds of people packed like sardines. No problem.

"those which are seemingly innocuous"

I'm a little tight on funds and the Fourth of July is coming up and some fireworks are always nice. Can you tell me which INNOCUOUS stuff from my kitchen I can mix together and make some low level legal fireworks? I hear the Innocuous Bomb is a real good one but Google doesn't have the recipie.

"The distinction is what the label says. IF there is a flammable warning on the label it goes into a hazmat tub."

This is too rich. So all someone has to do is peel off the "Acme Bomb- Danger" label and it's "Well this round black thing with the fuse sticking out does not have a label saying it's dangerous, must be regular trash"? I feel soo much safer already.

"Shouldn't unknowns be considered hazardous until proven benign?" That is EXACTLY what EPA requires the rest of the country to do. Have Kip call the EPA and ask "I have some flammable toxic unstable explosive Hazmat, can I just relabel it "Unknown" and throw it in the regular trash?" Business will save a fortune on disposal costs when this becomes the new official EPA policy.

Can I label my water bottle "I swear this is NOT a bomb-it's 99.99% WATER" and you'll let me keep it? After all, you just go by the label.

That would be too difficult to implement, so we just stick with window dressing

Feel free to correct me anytime you like. (but do provide some evidence, would you? ;) )

C'mon Spiff, you know all the "evidence" is Super Secret. Well, except for the stuff on youtube.

^ +1!

As long as it only results in inconvenience and extra out-of-pocket expense for the pax, it's okay. If it would take an extra DIME out of TSA's budget for ACTUAL SAFETY PURPOSES, well, I guess that's just too bad. If someone drops a leaky bottle of bleach into a trash can with a bottle of Windex, well, the screeners and passengers better just suck it up and deal with the poisonous fumes. Let's not even get started on someone dumping an actual WEAPON - an explosive or bio-chem bomb, say - into that convenient receptacle...

[Yoda voice]Safety? Heh! Security? Heh! TSA craves not these things![/Yoda voice]

Hope someone manages to nail them to the wall on either their blatant lies and hypocrisy or their violation of hazmat-disposal practices. At this point, I no longer care which.

Given that we, just recently, had the FA who set a fire in the on-board lav because he/she was PO'd at having to work that flight, how long do you think it would take for a PO'd screener to do exactly the same thing to get a day off due to a hazmat terminal dump?

Obviously, the correct plan of action is to ban Tang :D

Foxnews has jumped on the propaganda bandwagon (from TSA website link):

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356491,00.html

Gee, wonder if Fox "News" got a call from a random source named Blip Mawley.


If I don't, I will look at why the TSA spent money on new uniforms, badges and swanky parties and retreats before spending any money on new technology, or even simple x-ray machines.