Liquid Container size: 3 Ounce. Why not 3.4 = 100ml?
Nov 16, 2007, 3:09 pm
#31
Join Date: May 2004
Location: LAX
Programs: CO Platinum HHonors Diamond Avis President's Club
Posts: 2,312
I can't believe youse forriners haven't "harmonized" with the TSA and given up the stupid metro system. Use onces like we do in America, morans! Do you want to fly today??
peace,
~Ben~
peace,
~Ben~
Nov 17, 2007, 10:06 am
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,716
"A good round number? It's a meaningless number as it has no relationship to safety."
Oh right. I forgot what forum I'm on.
"Actually happened. I was talking to a guy while boarding a DL flight at BWI a few months back and he said his 3.5oz deodorant was confiscated for being over the limit. "
If the TSA rules were arbitrary about what size should be brought on board, then each freedom baggie that comes through screening would require a screener to check each and every item in the bag to see if it reasonable close to what they reasonably think is the right size. The are size limits put in place so that the TSA can give a quick look or spot check freedom baggies for items that are out of compliance. What you're giving a
to speeds things up.
The freedom baggie concept and rules are a very efficient way to accomplish the limits they are trying to put in place. Changing them so your fellow passenger can bring on board something that he knew he shouldn't be will only slow down that security line. I would think that would be cause for a.
I'm not sure how well versed your line buddy was in deodorant, but there are plenty of 3.4 or smaller sizes out there.
Oh right. I forgot what forum I'm on.
"Actually happened. I was talking to a guy while boarding a DL flight at BWI a few months back and he said his 3.5oz deodorant was confiscated for being over the limit. "
If the TSA rules were arbitrary about what size should be brought on board, then each freedom baggie that comes through screening would require a screener to check each and every item in the bag to see if it reasonable close to what they reasonably think is the right size. The are size limits put in place so that the TSA can give a quick look or spot check freedom baggies for items that are out of compliance. What you're giving a
to speeds things up. The freedom baggie concept and rules are a very efficient way to accomplish the limits they are trying to put in place. Changing them so your fellow passenger can bring on board something that he knew he shouldn't be will only slow down that security line. I would think that would be cause for a
.I'm not sure how well versed your line buddy was in deodorant, but there are plenty of 3.4 or smaller sizes out there.
Nov 17, 2007, 10:38 am
#34
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
Liquids should not be restricted AT ALL.
3 oz? STUPID
3.4 oz? STUPID
4 oz? STUPID
100 oz? STUPID
It is irrelevant that the TSA imbeciles chose 3.4 oz to pair with 100ml and the KHIAAH/KHIAI baggie sizes. These restrictions are both unnecessary and STUPID.
3 oz? STUPID
3.4 oz? STUPID
4 oz? STUPID
100 oz? STUPID
It is irrelevant that the TSA imbeciles chose 3.4 oz to pair with 100ml and the KHIAAH/KHIAI baggie sizes. These restrictions are both unnecessary and STUPID.
Nov 17, 2007, 10:40 am
#35
Join Date: Nov 2007
Programs: DHS, TSA, HOU
Posts: 63
So, let me get this straight; you think it's stupid?
Nov 18, 2007, 11:58 am
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
This stupid rule is frustrating for those of us that wear contact lenses. The vast majority of travel size contact lense solutions sold in drug stores are in 4 oz. bottles.
Nov 18, 2007, 12:43 pm
#37
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: RSW
Programs: Delta - Silver; UA - Silver; HHonors - Diamond; IHG - Spire Ambassador; Marriott Bonvoy - Titanium
Posts: 14,185
In theory your 4 oz bottle of solution is allowed outside the bag as a medical item. I know, I know ... they can confiscate whatever they want.
Nov 18, 2007, 12:50 pm
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
Nov 18, 2007, 5:28 pm
#39
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 1,439
I for one feel much safer knowing that 3.5 oz of hair gel will not be permitted in the secure area. Imagine the consequences!
[sarcasm font: OFF]
Seriously, it is absurd the amount of our "security" professionals' time spent validating volumes contained in our toiletries rather than looking for ACTUAL security threats.
My favorite recent story: a GAO report citing a staffer who managed to smuggle potential bomb-making materials past security, but had his medicated dandruff shampoo confiscated.
Come on, let's train our security "professionals" to actually look for security threats! Not for personal hygiene items!!
[sarcasm font: OFF]
Seriously, it is absurd the amount of our "security" professionals' time spent validating volumes contained in our toiletries rather than looking for ACTUAL security threats.
My favorite recent story: a GAO report citing a staffer who managed to smuggle potential bomb-making materials past security, but had his medicated dandruff shampoo confiscated.
Come on, let's train our security "professionals" to actually look for security threats! Not for personal hygiene items!!
Nov 18, 2007, 5:38 pm
#40
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Catania, Sicily/South Jersey (PHL)/Houston, Texas/Red Stick/airborne in-between
Programs: United Global Svs, AA PlatPro, WN RR, AZ/ITA Freccia, Hilton Diam, Bonvoy Gold, Hertz Prez, IHG
Posts: 3,548
HOnestly, the thing that peeves me the most is not having the process. I have the clearance, I know the threats. The thing that peeves me is no standardisation. Today I was flying in uniform, back in the states. IN Orlando I knew my badges would set off the machine and told them to screen me. They did, but didn't make me take my belt off. Later in the day in Bryan,Texas they said, you must take your belt off for second screening, it is policy...? Then in Houston the guy told me military didn't have to take their shoes off if they don't set off the machine, and my same metal badges that set off the machine in Orlando did not this evening (I know the sensitivity is changed but I had a lot of metal on).
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
Nov 19, 2007, 1:02 pm
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
HOnestly, the thing that peeves me the most is not having the process. I have the clearance, I know the threats. The thing that peeves me is no standardisation. Today I was flying in uniform, back in the states. IN Orlando I knew my badges would set off the machine and told them to screen me. They did, but didn't make me take my belt off. Later in the day in Bryan,Texas they said, you must take your belt off for second screening, it is policy...? Then in Houston the guy told me military didn't have to take their shoes off if they don't set off the machine, and my same metal badges that set off the machine in Orlando did not this evening (I know the sensitivity is changed but I had a lot of metal on).
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
Thanks for your service. ^
Nov 24, 2007, 11:36 pm
#43
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: BOM, Ex-TX/ CA
Programs: Ex CO/ UA Gold, Hotels.. TBD
Posts: 734
HOnestly, the thing that peeves me the most is not having the process. I have the clearance, I know the threats. The thing that peeves me is no standardisation. Today I was flying in uniform, back in the states. IN Orlando I knew my badges would set off the machine and told them to screen me. They did, but didn't make me take my belt off. Later in the day in Bryan,Texas they said, you must take your belt off for second screening, it is policy...? Then in Houston the guy told me military didn't have to take their shoes off if they don't set off the machine, and my same metal badges that set off the machine in Orlando did not this evening (I know the sensitivity is changed but I had a lot of metal on).
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
In Germany we had the same procedures everywhere (didn't have to take my shoes off). In Italy I can talk my way through, a whole other story. Otherwise in Europe I find the process streamlined and the same everywhere.
I would like a standardised process in the states, to include 100ML noe of this 3 once stuff.
Ciao,
FH
Most of the times I've flown out of IAH I have had to remove my shoes pretty much all the time. Even watches & cell phones. A lot of other places I have had to remove my watch as well (Its a leather strap one).
Now some family I know up in DFW tell me they did not have to remove the watches etc. other metal items.
Remove belt or not.. etc..
Too many variations..
Also, if someone really wanted to get 20 ounces of certain liquids, they would have 7 people enter with 3 ounces each and then leave it for assimilation in a restroom stall.
There are so many workarounds. Whoever figured out the TSA rules is STOOOPIIIIID.
UPDATE:
I was checking online on Continental.com and noticed the 3.4oz/100ml limit thing specified by the page before the Boarding Pass page.
Where could I find a copy of something similar out on the TSA or some official website? PLEASE point me to it.
Nov 25, 2007, 12:10 am
#44
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: BOM, Ex-TX/ CA
Programs: Ex CO/ UA Gold, Hotels.. TBD
Posts: 734
I just searched through the TSA website for 100ml and I found 2 links that contain the 100ml limit. The Spanish and Japanese language versions of the 3-1-1 brochure.
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311-broch-spanish.pdf
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311-broch-japanese.pdf
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311-broch-spanish.pdf
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311-broch-japanese.pdf
Feb 28, 2010, 4:04 am
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW/DAL
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, AS MVPG, HH Diamond, NCL Platinum Plus, MSC Diamond
Posts: 21,422
Can you please point out a link for that please? I'll probably keep a print out of that permanently for myself when I travel.
The link I posted might be dates but it states 3.0 oz
http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm This too.
I AM NOT.. trying to ask a Rhetorical Question. I am trying to see if we can MAKE THIS HAPPEN. Its something that would be much easier to get through than dispose of the whole LIQUID thing.
The link I posted might be dates but it states 3.0 oz
http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm This too.
I AM NOT.. trying to ask a Rhetorical Question. I am trying to see if we can MAKE THIS HAPPEN. Its something that would be much easier to get through than dispose of the whole LIQUID thing.
I just wanted to update this posters comments, as the link now shows 3.4 ounces, even though none of the signs show anything other than 3 ounces as the max. For example: http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311-credit-card.pdf
However, the link from the previous poster, now shows 3.4 oz.
http://www.tsa.gov/311/index.shtm
3-1-1 for carry-ons = 3.4 ounce (100ml) bottle or less (by volume) ;