I'm sorry but that's like saying they can't tell if you need a gun on board the plane. There's no one else TO make that judgment. If it isn't perfectly made, well, gosh it is an imperfect world, isn't it? But then why not put the solution into a 3 oz bottle and be done with this manufactured drama?

a gun???
 

Because some travelers need to be away longer than a 3 oz. bottle will last, or are going somewhere they will not be able to buy more (what do you think the chances of finding Clear Care are in Dar es Salaam?), or have coexisting medical problems that make transferring from larger to smaller bottles inadvisable.

The drama is manufactured by TSA, not the passenger.

Comparing contact lens solution to a firearm is kind of a stretch, don't you think? :rolleyes:

What if someone can't wear glasses? Unusual, but I can think of a few ways it could happen.

What if someone wears contacts, and owns no glasses, or doesn't have them when they travel? I only wear glasses when I sleep, and my vision is poorer with glasses than with contacts. Why do you wish me to suffer lessened visual acuity which could potentially lead to a car crash, because YOU think that my vision correction is a "luxury" or a "convenience"?

You don't get to make that choice, and you don't get to give up MY rights.

My contact solution is a MEDICAL NECESSITY.

Where exactly is it written that that is you right? As I've said ad nauseam, people confuse their wants and their rights. For them, there is the Tea Party.

You want to go political, start a thread in OMNI.

This is TS&S, and we're discussing medical-necessity exceptions to the War On Liquids. Contact solutions are SPECIFICALLY LISTED by TSA as permissible. My use of contact lenses for vision correction is between my eye doctor - a *MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL* - and myself. A screener has no grounds to deny me use of my vision correction, or to deny me what I need to make use of those MEDICALLY-NECESSARY DEVICES.

Your continued defense of proposed violations of both my *RIGHTS* and TSA's own SOP is, frankly, puzzling. But then, over in the thread on drug mules, you advocated permitting diabetics to go into comas and DIE because you don't think they need their insulin and hypodermics, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised that you have no problem with temporarily blinding millions of passengers as well.:rolleyes::mad:

The fact remains that TSA has no say in my use of contact lenses for vision correction, as NONE of them are doctors, and TSA *SPECIFICALLY PERMITS* me (and anyone else) to bring contact solution onboard under the medical-necessity exception. Why you cannot understand and accept this is, again, puzzling.

The 14th Amendment. Note that this is much stronger than the ADA. The latter applies to private entities and indeed, as TSORon says, has limits to what that entity must do to accomodate a disabled person. But the government, when operating under the power of law, has no such limitation because the 14th Amendment is absolute. All people have equal protection under the law. If two people, one disabled and one not, present themselves at the checkpoint, the Constitution requires that both be permitted to fly with any items required for their safety unless the government can prove, not merely suspect that said items are a danger to others. And TSOs have, as I understand it, sworn to uphold the Consititution.

And in an in-flight emergency, in which passengers and belongings are jostled about, which is safer? Eyeglasses, which could fly off of a person's head and strike another person, injuring them --- or worse, not be found, rendering the passenger unable to follow the instructions of the flight crew on how to exit the aircraft? Or contact lenses, which have neither of those problems?

What is wrong with have a requirement for people visiting this country? Our security needs should be made dependent on what some foreign drug company has decided is convenient for them to do? Are we now kissing foreign ... for some reason? When I went to France, the fact that something was OK with TSA cut no ice with them at all. It was "tough, we have our own rules". Well, why is that OK for France but "wrong" for the USA?

*I* am! I'm a very degree high myope (look it up on the Google!) with my glasses I have little to no peripheral vision, which I need in a crowded airport. Contacts allow me some semblance of a visual field off to the periphery that glasses do not. Its safer for both of us if i'm not left to stumble in my glasses.

Who are you to tell me that I do not need my contacts? Shame on you.

Oh, gosh, I'm soooooooooo humbled. Look,dammit, bring along a doctor's note with some kind of proof of its authenticity. The plain fact is that contacts are almost NEVER medically necessary. You've just admitted you can see without having that specific aid. You just have the SAME problem as any glaucoma sufferer. So?

Don't hand me a load of crap and try to emotionally blackmail me! Its never worked and isn't going to start working now.

It's been explained numerous times that TSOs must ignore such documents because there's no way to establish authenticity. Nobody's saying that items that are claimed medically necessary shouldn't be tested to ensure they aren't prohibited items, but rather than unless they actually are prohibited, they must be allowed.

What if you can't get replacements where you are going and need more than 3oz?

What's the point of having the test then, if things that fail it are still allowed?

Carry on the 3 oz, check the big bottle.

^ and 56 for goalie-parents this september

but you already know what the result will be, right? ;)

correct-what is supposed to happen doesn't always happen but from a traveler's standpoint-the recourse option fails as tsa corporate doesn't "play well in that sandbox".

now you gotta be careful as if your supervisor tells you "we don't have time", and that gets out (i.e. overheard by a pax), even tho it may be within <redacted due to ssi ;)>, the press would have a field day with it as it shows that the job is not being done

You are not an eye doctor...therefore its NOT your decision. Nor is it the decision of some random TSA person.

Drop your own condescending crap and wake up to the fact that until you are my prescribing physician, its not your decision if its medically necessary or not.

Your *opinion* is not fact.