Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Is inconsistency the norm?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 17, 2006 | 8:46 pm
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
5M
100 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike.. but I wanna go home with the armadillo
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus. Eurobonus Millionaire
Posts: 38,683
Originally Posted by thegeneral
I haven't seen any of the inconsistencies at all, but I'm pretty strict in my regimen, so I get through pretty quickly. It should be the front line management's fault if there are inconsistencies. The employees are just following lead. When I go to McDonald's and get a Big Mac, it's the same in every city. The rules, regardless of what people think of them, should be enforced in a uniform way.

That being said, it's another way that the TSA is damned either way. Half of the people on here want individual screeners to use common sense and the other half want them to just follow policy.
They can do both at the same time. Regarding plastic bags, if there is one item, who cares what size the plastic bag is or whether it is even in one as long as the item is the proper size? The bag is designed to limit the amount of liquids/gels a passenger can bring in. It is otherwise unimportant. A single 3oz bottle that is not in a bag should be cleared. That is common sense.

I've had things rejected that were okay according to all of the rules. These items had already passed through many TSA checkpoints including (on a prior trip) the one where I had a problem. Why did I have a problem? Because the TSA made up a new rule on his own. Thus, I have found that the rules are NOT uniformly enforced becuase they are, in fact, not all written down!
Xyzzy is offline  
Old Dec 18, 2006 | 11:45 am
  #32  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
Originally Posted by thegeneral

"Unacceptable because it wasn't a "zip" bag. At DCA."

While this does seem to be nitpicking, you have to think it through. I've heard so many people complain about the actual regulations without stopping to think why they were made this way.

Quart sized bag (exlcuding the argument about liquids not being a threat): ...

The clear Zip lock part: The clear bag lets individual screeners quickly verify what is in them, so that they don't have to mess with opening anything up and resealing it. These plastic bags are inexpensive and easily found. The zip part makes them quickly resealable. A shopping bag is not something that is quickly resealable and has the ability to violate the one ounce limit.
And exactly what friggin difference does it make whether it's resealable? The bag in question was a clear (not brown or white) bag like you get at a checkout. It was clearly less than a quart. No need to open it, the 3 toiletries appeared to fit fine inside. The only thing missing was the zip-top. Is that enough for confiscation? Shouldn't be....

Perhaps the person picked up the toiletries on the way to the airport. Perhaps they had no zip locks at home. Who knows. The INTENT of the rule was met. Only a "by the letter of the book" kind of person would support confiscation of these goods under these circumstances. You, apparently, would allow for no discretion when the size and volume constraints were met. Would you also support arrest for someone going one mile over the speed limit.

Most of us here know exactly what the rules are, and we follow them... without regard to our opinion of the rules. Someone who doesn't fly every day should get the benefit of the doubt when the INTENT of the rule is met. Frankly, the amount of time the TSO spent on this person could have been better spent on real threats, not harrassment of a passenger that was trying to comply.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Dec 18, 2006 | 11:54 am
  #33  
cpx
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 99654
Programs: Many
Posts: 6,450
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer
Frankly, the amount of time the TSO spent on this person could have been better spent on real threats, not harrassment of a passenger that was trying to comply.
Very well said. This has all been nothing but the waste of our tax money...
This may increase the sense of security in some people, but in fact
this diverts the resources from doing the real security screening...
just to shake down tooth paste, water and lunch from people.
cpx is offline  
Old Dec 18, 2006 | 1:03 pm
  #34  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,034
Originally Posted by thegeneral
Doing things in such a way delays the line VERY little. The delays are caused when people leave things in their bag causing a secondary search to be needed, or when people use bags that violate the rules by being larger than one ounce and not easily resealable. The rules seem arbitrary, but they're actually all setup to make things flow quickly.

To nobody's surprise, everything is so perfect in your world. Congratulations. You really are perfect. Most of us can only wish to be a fraction of you.


But the reality is that people still don't know about the ever-changing rules. Kip Hawley and his troopers can say it's designed to keep terrorists off-track, whatever.

But the fact of the matter is that 80% of the people in an average plane's load are Ma and Pa Kettle....the folks that can't or don't keep up with the TSA rhetoric.

Some TSAers like to point out signs informing them of procedure. Last week, I decided to count how many signs there were at DEN. From the entrance of the priority security line, to where the ID checker is, about 250 feet of walking, there were 22 signs. Ranging from "don't cut under the rope" to the liquid nonsense rules.

Rather than being informative and proactive, the TSA has mastered the "CYA" and "Baffle them with BS" mantras.

Again, congratulations on your pristine existence.
LessO2 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.