FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)
-   -   Do we have to remove belts with plastic buckles for NoS? (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/1217963-do-we-have-remove-belts-plastic-buckles-nos.html)

FlyMeToTheLooneyBin May 22, 2011 2:32 am

Do we have to remove belts with plastic buckles for NoS?
 
If I were to get a belt with a plastic belt buckle, do I still have to remove my belt when going through the NoS?

InkUnderNails May 22, 2011 5:10 am

Yes. All belts have to come off. I understand it is because what can be obscured behind the belt.

RichardKenner May 22, 2011 6:03 am


Originally Posted by FlyMeToTheLooneyBin (Post 16428297)
If I were to get a belt with a plastic belt buckle, do I still have to remove my belt when going through the NoS?

It's not a metal detector, so the material doesn't matter.

Often1 May 22, 2011 6:19 am

Yes. NoS technology has nothing to do with metal, that is the whole point. It looks for objects.

jpmcdonough May 22, 2011 10:08 am

They make you take your belt off and empty your pockets even at airports that don't have the n-o-s. I got chewed out by a TSAer in BTV for having a handkerchief in my back pocket going through the WTMD.

I said we didn't have to do that before, what changed? Nothing, it's always been the rule.

Eastasia has always been the enemy.

Caradoc May 22, 2011 11:42 am


Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16428541)
Yes. All belts have to come off. I understand it is because what can be obscured behind the belt.

Besides... how is the TSA clerk supposed to get his or her hands into your pants for the additional pat-down if there's a belt in the way?

FlyMeToTheLooneyBin May 22, 2011 11:46 am

Yes, I understand it's not a metal detector. I just thought that each material had different reflective properties, and whether metal would glow enough to produce a halo that obscures nearby objects. Looking at the pornography on this stuff on the internet, I see that's not really the case.

That's annoying. I hate taking off my belt.

InkUnderNails May 22, 2011 12:09 pm


Originally Posted by FlyMeToTheLooneyBin (Post 16429809)

That's annoying. I hate taking off my belt.

Yeah, tell me about it.

goalie May 22, 2011 1:08 pm


Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16428541)
Yes. All belts have to come off. I understand it is because what can be obscured behind the belt.

So a NoS can see one's junk but it can't see something hiding behind a belt? :confused: :rolleyes:

FlyMeToTheLooneyBin May 22, 2011 1:09 pm


Originally Posted by goalie (Post 16430147)
So a NoS can see one's junk but it can't see something hiding behind a belt? :confused: :rolleyes:

Maybe they should devise some pants which have belt-like properties near the private areas to obscure that. :)

loops May 22, 2011 3:52 pm

piece d' resistance?
 
In musing about ever-changing trends in fashions over the years (hem lines, tie widths, etc... ) and how fashions of long ago experience the occasional renaissance, I wonder, why haven't we seen men in doublets, tights and cod-pieces in a while? :eek:

Pesky Monkey May 22, 2011 4:16 pm


Originally Posted by FlyMeToTheLooneyBin (Post 16429809)
Yes, I understand it's not a metal detector. I just thought that each material had different reflective properties, and whether metal would glow enough to produce a halo that obscures nearby objects. Looking at the pornography on this stuff on the internet, I see that's not really the case.

That's annoying. I hate taking off my belt.

I might wear my shorts with a built-in belt the next time I fly. It can't be removed. Might cause mass confusion among the smurfs.

chollie May 22, 2011 7:48 pm


Originally Posted by jpmcdonough (Post 16429440)
I said we didn't have to do that before, what changed? Nothing, it's always been the rule.

Eastasia has always been the enemy.

(bolding mine) :mad::mad::mad:

I don't care whether this is at the checkpoint or anywhere else. It really really gripes me when a worker is so stupid (and yes, it is stupid) as to say "It's always been the rule".

I have no problem with someone saying "It's been that way as long as I've been working here and I just started last month", but that complete lie, frequently from someone who clearly hasn't been familiar with whatever the process is as long as I have.

I'm sure we've all been asked a similar question, in professional or personal circumstances. Why lie? If the answer is supposed to head off any possible discussion, why not just say "That's the way it is now and I don't know exactly when/why it changed."

chollie May 22, 2011 7:50 pm


Originally Posted by Pesky Monkey (Post 16430881)
I might wear my shorts with a built-in belt the next time I fly. It can't be removed. Might cause mass confusion among the smurfs.

Yikes! I've got summer-weight trousers with the built-in belt. Haven't worn them since all the changes last fall, but now the weather's getting warmer. Guess it would be better not to wear them. I don't want to have to try to explain that no, even if I pull really really hard, the belt won't come out, it will just wreck my trousers. :td:

InkUnderNails May 22, 2011 7:53 pm

The non-removable belt may put one into the no option private resolution pat down territory. :p


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:17 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.