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/)
-   -   Knitting Needles? (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/350118-knitting-needles.html)

TSAMGR Aug 31, 2004 7:57 pm


Originally Posted by GradGirl
TSA apologists, this is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about when I say the penalty for too much screening is not inconvenience but loss of liberty. A regular, law-abiding citizen feels unfree to bring along the current knitting project. Others feel unfree to dress as they would normally, and still others feel unfree to criticize the authorities at the checkpoint. All of these people travel under the threat of very real penalties for doing the things they feel unfree to do, so this is not baseless fear. Taking these freedoms away from people can not make us more safe, only more afraid. Why can't we learn to speak rationally about relative risks?

Frequent Whiners, this is the reason I didn't even bother posting on this thread. It doesn't matter what we post we will be wrong and you will complain and name call.

Bart Sep 1, 2004 7:08 am

Deleted

oklAAhoma Sep 1, 2004 7:32 am


Originally Posted by Bart
In addition to sharing information with passengers, I also hope to share some insights with fellow TSA employees, and perhaps that's a start towards standardization.

Would you consider relocating to DFW or OKC? :) Pretty please!

Buster Sep 1, 2004 10:40 am

Thank you Bart for your post. TSAMGR, I'm sorry you view me as a "frequent whiner." I asked a question regarding policy without any kind of whining - I really wanted input as to TSA views on these things.

Bart, you hit the nail on the head. It's really the inconsistency that is the trouble. When I was at TUC this weekend, there was a giant trash can of nail clippers at the checkpoint. I thought nail clippers were not on the prohibited list, but at TUC, they were clearly being confiscated. While knitting needles may be OK at some checkpoints, they may be confiscated at others. I think it's inconsistent application of rules across checkpoints (sometimes different checkpoints at the same terminal or airport) that bothers people the most. If there are clear guidelines that we are all aware of, we as travelers can pack appropriately and speed things up!

oklAAhoma Sep 1, 2004 1:02 pm


Originally Posted by Buster
Bart, you hit the nail on the head. It's really the inconsistency that is the trouble. <snip> I think it's inconsistent application of rules across checkpoints (sometimes different checkpoints at the same terminal or airport) that bothers people the most. If there are clear guidelines that we are all aware of, we as travelers can pack appropriately and speed things up!

Exactly! It's the inconsistency that is so frustrating. I realize that it's in my best interest to carry (and wear) items that are within the guidelines - speedier security process, avoid secondary search and confiscation of belongongs, etc. But it is extremely frustrating to plan my wardrobe and pack my carryon with the security rules in mind, only to find that the rules have changed, or are being ignored, or that they are completely abitrary.

The OP wanted to know about knitting needles. If they are not on the prohibited list, it is hard to comprehend (or accept) the fact that they could still be disallowed by the TSA at any given checkpoint. I don't understand how that enhances security.

GradGirl Sep 1, 2004 2:38 pm


Originally Posted by Buster
Thank you Bart for your post. TSAMGR, I'm sorry you view me as a "frequent whiner." I asked a question regarding policy without any kind of whining - I really wanted input as to TSA views on these things.

Hi Buster,

Sorry for bringing that on you - I'm pretty sure it's me that TSAMGR addressed as a "frequent whiner". I'll accept that tag: I do post frequently, and nearly always to argue for more freedom and less wasteful and invasive searching at airport checkpoints.

Designtime Sep 1, 2004 4:08 pm


Originally Posted by TSAMGR
Frequent Whiners, this is the reason I didn't even bother posting on this thread. It doesn't matter what we post we will be wrong and you will complain and name call.

Why would you post a message to a thread explaining that you weren't going to post to said thread? :confused:

I think it is interesting that you would be surprised that people might be unhappy that rules were applied inconsistently.

I think it would drive most people nuts if there was no consistency in something that they had to do often.

law dawg Sep 1, 2004 4:20 pm


Originally Posted by Designtime
Why would you post a message to a thread explaining that you weren't going to post to said thread? :confused:

I think it is interesting that you would be surprised that people might be unhappy that rules were applied inconsistently.

I think it would drive most people nuts if there was no consistency in something that they had to do often.

But that is the very nature of the American system - diversity. Our founders did not WANT uniformity. They wanted each state to set its own guidelines. So while it is infuriating it is also the way it is supposed to be.

Designtime Sep 1, 2004 4:32 pm

Let me be more clear.
I think most people would be irritated if the rules (or laws) governing something that they did often were applied inconsistently.

In Washington State you can drive in the carpool lane by yourself during non-peak hours on some highways. What kind of uproar would there be if the State Patrol said, "There is no law against it, but the officer might still give you a ticket if he thinks that the freeways are too congested."

Is that any less logical than saying that knitting needles are not prohibited, but the person screening them still might not let you travel with them?

law dawg Sep 1, 2004 4:38 pm


Originally Posted by Designtime
Let me be more clear.
I think most people would be irritated if the rules (or laws) governing something that they did often were applied inconsistently.

In Washington State you can drive in the carpool lane by yourself during non-peak hours on some highways. What kind of uproar would there be if the State Patrol said, "There is no law against it, but the officer might still give you a ticket if he thinks that the freeways are too congested."

Is that any less logical than saying that knitting needles are not prohibited, but the person screening them still might not let you travel with them?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. What I am saying is that each airport is its own little island and has its own head and its own interpretation of things. That is the American way.

Your analogy is within the state of Washington. Do you expect the same rules and laws to apply in Florida?

Designtime Sep 1, 2004 4:50 pm


Originally Posted by law dawg
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. What I am saying is that each airport is its own little island and has its own head and its own interpretation of things. That is the American way.

Your analogy is within the state of Washington. Do you expect the same rules and laws to apply in Florida?

I don't expect the same laws to be in effect in Florida. Just like I don't expect TSA rules in effect when I travel to Mexico. But if I travel to Spokane, where rules are inforced by the same State Patrol, I would expect the same rules to be followed. The carpool lane example is not the best because carpool lanes don't exist in many parts of the state. But the TSA is a national entity, and for good reason. There is a level of standarization that is required to make sure that the system works well. I assert that this lack of standardization is one of the things that has the agency occur as unprofessional to some people. A certain level of unpredictability is needed in the screening processs, but the enforcement of it should be the same.

Buster Sep 1, 2004 5:09 pm

Um, I'm not really sure I want to jump into this fray, but I really don't think that the states rights vs. federalism argument is the correct analogy for this situation. States rights vs. Federalism is a totally different can of worms. We're talking about application of Federal laws and regulations by various FEDERAL agencies. There are lots of places where laws and regulations enacted at the Federal level are consistently applied across smaller Federal agency unit levels, such as Federal securities laws. For example, regulations promulgated under the Securites Exchange Act of 1934 are enforced generally uniformly by various SEC offices around the country. Each SEC office undoubtedly has its own head of enforcement. I seriously doubt that the Los Angeles office could suddenly decide that it was going to require companies in the Los Angeles area to file its quarterly reports a month earlier than otherwise stated in the regulation because it is its own island and is free to interpret regulations as it pleases. I think this is a more appropriate analogy.

I think that all we are asking is for uniform application of TSA regulations at all airports around the country. I don't think that this is un-American, nor do I think that inconsistent application of Federal regulations is particularly the "American way." It may be the way things are done in this instance, but it doesn't mean that it's the right way.

Designtime Sep 1, 2004 5:20 pm


Originally Posted by Buster
Um, I'm not really sure I want to jump into this fray, but I really don't think that the states rights vs. federalism argument is the correct analogy for this situation. States rights vs. Federalism is a totally different can of worms. We're talking about application of Federal laws and regulations by various FEDERAL agencies. There are lots of places where laws and regulations enacted at the Federal level are consistently applied across smaller Federal agency unit levels, such as Federal securities laws. For example, regulations promulgated under the Securites Exchange Act of 1934 are enforced generally uniformly by various SEC offices around the country. Each SEC office undoubtedly has its own head of enforcement. I seriously doubt that the Los Angeles office could suddenly decide that it was going to require companies in the Los Angeles area to file its quarterly reports a month earlier than otherwise stated in the regulation because it is its own island and is free to interpret regulations as it pleases. I think this is a more appropriate analogy.

I think that all we are asking is for uniform application of TSA regulations at all airports around the country. I don't think that this is un-American, nor do I think that inconsistent application of Federal regulations is particularly the "American way." It may be the way things are done in this instance, but it doesn't mean that it's the right way.

You call that a fray?! In the Flyertalk Travel/Security forum that exchange almost counts as agreement! :D
I do however agree with your point 100%

law dawg Sep 1, 2004 9:33 pm


Originally Posted by Buster
Um, I'm not really sure I want to jump into this fray, but I really don't think that the states rights vs. federalism argument is the correct analogy for this situation. States rights vs. Federalism is a totally different can of worms. We're talking about application of Federal laws and regulations by various FEDERAL agencies. There are lots of places where laws and regulations enacted at the Federal level are consistently applied across smaller Federal agency unit levels, such as Federal securities laws. For example, regulations promulgated under the Securites Exchange Act of 1934 are enforced generally uniformly by various SEC offices around the country. Each SEC office undoubtedly has its own head of enforcement. I seriously doubt that the Los Angeles office could suddenly decide that it was going to require companies in the Los Angeles area to file its quarterly reports a month earlier than otherwise stated in the regulation because it is its own island and is free to interpret regulations as it pleases. I think this is a more appropriate analogy.

I think that all we are asking is for uniform application of TSA regulations at all airports around the country. I don't think that this is un-American, nor do I think that inconsistent application of Federal regulations is particularly the "American way." It may be the way things are done in this instance, but it doesn't mean that it's the right way.

But each airport has its own local LEOs correct? None are federal property?

alamedaguy Nov 15, 2004 2:49 pm

Does anyone know where I can find any regulations for British security - specifically at MAN? I found this http://www.manchester-airport-parkin...t_security.htm , which specifically prohibits knitting needles, but I am interested in a crochet hook. I lost one to security at FRA this weekend, which really made the trip home take a long time.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:39 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.