abmj-jr

Just heard a radio news report this morning that our local area state senator has brokered a deal in which the hundreds of pounds of toiletries, water, lotions and so forth that are confiscated by TSA at our local airport will be donated to a local homeless shelter. He is crowing about how all the many unused, unopened "high quality" products will make a nice difference for those in need.

All this begs the question. If we are confident that the seized materials are safe, why are they being confiscated in the first place? Isn't the perception that we just don't know if they are dangerous or not, so better safe than sorry? If TSA is concerned that these items are too dangerous for the owner/traveler to keep, why are we endangering the poor and needy? Is any testing going to be done before unloading the stuff on the local shelters?

An airport official was quoted as saying this will save tons of materials per year from being dumped into our overcrowded landfill. I think that is the real motivation here.

You'd think the policy makers would see the inanity of all this but I suppose that is giving far more credit to the politicians than they deserve.

I don't think forced confiscation and redistribution of anything of value constitutes a "donation."

MKEbound

I hope you write your Senator and ask this very question.

http://www.senate.gov/ - click on "find my Senator" in the upper right hand corner and be linked to their email address.

or http://www.senate.ca.gov/ if it's your CA State Senator

vassilipan

Theft and robbery come to mind.

FliesWay2Much

Wow -- Government-directed redistribution of wealth...

... How so quaintly Communist...

2travelfar

I still find it hard to believe that travelers are trying to carry products that are not permitted(duh)...that's not to say that some people (like the poor sippy cup mother) aren't forced into confiscation of permitted products...but 'donating' them?? Bad, bad idea....I'm all for minimizing landfill consumption, but that's ludicris.

swag

The verboten liquids only become explosive when mixed together, right? So as long as the homeless rinse the shampoo out of their hair before applying the conditioner, they won't be in any danger.

uva185

lol

essxjay

Senator Clueless gets an "F" on my Phil 101 exam for conflating the concepts of "security threat" and "charitable donation." Dummkopf!

Or, as my 12-year-old rent-A-kid might say, "F" is for f***tard.

Points Scrounger

Either the stuff is hazardous ... or it's not!

abmj-jr

And yet, Senator Clueless (I like that, it fits), who is positioning for a run for Lt. Governor wants "to see this at every airport."

Link to newspaper story this morning: http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/60033.html

SNA_Flyer

What an idiot. Must want to be the next Kip Hawley.

BigBopper

Maybe they just think no one will complain if a homeless person gets poisoned or explodes in the shower. Afterall, they're just the homeless

Lurker1999

Just the latest version of security theater. Let's enact some irrational rules, bully the rest of the world to follow those rules and then try to fix the problem created by yet another stupid idea.

Welcome to your tax dollars at work in the era of global security.

Bart

I have to agree with you here. Makes the rest of us look bad for following the procedures assigned to us.

Same idiots (speaking about Congress in general) who mandated that lighters be prohibited.

Please do write your Congresscritter. I'd be more than happy to see the policy change.

We Will Never Forget

Nothing is "forced" and nothing is "confiscated".

There are always alternatives.

And if Kippy's theory is correct, we will have homeless people blowing themselves up left and right. That's a lot cheaper than the drug and mental health services they need.