![]() |
Originally Posted by PHLJJS
(Post 10043767)
Security at SFO is run by a private company, not TSA. They wear very similar looking uniforms, so it is very easy get confused. I only mention this as it may be a reason as to why he was so unhelpful and tried to blow her off.
I made her explain the whole story again to me to make sure I got it right, I did. She took a shuttle to the airport, had no luggage to check. She had a bottle of water with her so she sat in one of the rocking chairs, took her medication and finished off the water, put her meds in the ziplock then into the bag which she says she closed all the way then went right to security. She has contacted SAN, nothing in lost and found, no one has called the pharmacy to say they found it. She has also contacted the airport authority and Harbor Police. Funny that the guys not being TSA that he didn't just tell her, not my problem, not TSA instead of going through all the whole thing and saying he called. Would have been easier that way. |
How to carry meds
Originally Posted by wharvey
(Post 10045043)
I cannot believe that someone would put their medications in checked luggage.... especially with how much luggage gets lost.
I'm down to five different meds and have several as a 30 day supply even though my health coverage encourages me to get 90 days through their mail order. That means larger bottles. I'm trying to follow the advice to have my meds in their original bottles. I will have a some in my carryon in a weekly pillbox. The bottles will be in the checked bag. Yes, I think about which are the critical subset. Am I missing something? Luggage is often delayed, rarely lost (should I say that out loud?). Pilferage is a serious problem. TSA can buy worthless badges, but not video for there inspection stations?? |
Originally Posted by wharvey
(Post 10045043)
I cannot believe that someone would put their medications in checked luggage.... especially with how much luggage gets lost.
I take medications for my diabetes and would NEVER think of putting them in checked luggage.... that is just asking for trouble.... William |
Originally Posted by shyabrasive
(Post 10045466)
I'm going home tonight to pack for just under three weeks. My carryon is already over weight and bulk and my checked luggage has room.
I'm down to five different meds and have several as a 30 day supply even though my health coverage encourages me to get 90 days through their mail order. That means larger bottles. I'm trying to follow the advice to have my meds in their original bottles. I will have a some in my carryon in a weekly pillbox. The bottles will be in the checked bag. Yes, I think about which are the critical subset. Am I missing something? Luggage is often delayed, rarely lost (should I say that out loud?). Pilferage is a serious problem. TSA can buy worthless badges, but not video for there inspection stations?? Also, if you ask your pharmacy (or the mail order company), they should be able to supply you with additional, smaller, labled bottles into which you can put the amount of medication you need for the trip you're taking. |
Originally Posted by shyabrasive
(Post 10045466)
I'm going home tonight to pack for just under three weeks. My carryon is already over weight and bulk and my checked luggage has room.
I never check anything but clothing. On the other hand, millions of bags travel uneventfully every year. We're a bit paranoid here in TS/S :D Still, I would not checks meds. I carry 30 pounds of camera equipment in addition to my personal carryon. I wonder what you can possibly be carrying that weighs more? |
TSA aren't the only ones with access to your bags. It's impossible to say for sure that this was their problem.
|
Originally Posted by thegeneral
(Post 10047628)
TSA aren't the only ones with access to your bags. It's impossible to say for sure that this was their problem.
|
Originally Posted by thegeneral
(Post 10047628)
TSA aren't the only ones with access to your bags. It's impossible to say for sure that this was their problem.
The TSA regularly allows criminals* and/or incompetent employees access to bags. Any theft from a checked bag is either due to the TSA failing to protect a checked bag from criminals, or due to TSA negligence (not putting an item back into a bag after a search). Either way I can say that every item taken from a checked bag (before arrival on the conveyor) is an example of the TSA failing to do its job. *: Not necessarily convicted ones. Anyone who steals from a checked bag is a criminal |
People who are victims of theft need to report it EVERY TIME. I know it's a pain, but it makes it easier to develop a pattern. You may not get any results, but the next person might.
The money they wasted on uniforms could have been allocated for cameras. But, I guess a dog and pony show is much more beneficial to Homeland Security than catching criminals. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by ralfp
(Post 10041456)
Evidence: The TSA requires that bags be unlocked (or its equivalent: "protected" by a TSA lock). They're ethically just as responsible for theft as a police department that leaves a home with open windows & doors after conducting a search when the owner is away. They may not have taken any items, but they sure as hell bare a good part of the blame for any resultant theft.
Unfortunately the TSA reacts much like such a police department would react: "tough luck". And good luck trying to sue, sovereign immunity protects them. This isn't going to change until we make this situation a "do something about this or I work for your opponent's political campaign" issue. And unfortunately there have been two documented cases where letters saying exactly that have been turned over to law enforcement as "threatening". This is not the nation my grandfather served in the Pacific to protect. :mad::mad::mad: |
Originally Posted by Mongah
(Post 10042536)
Yeah, I can see it now, a TSA agent admitting that the medications he or she STOLE made them sick :rolleyes:
|
In looking for some information re SSI, I came across a report that said prosecution of a baggage screener for theft had been dropped because information that would have been disclosed was SSI.
Prosecution of Screener dropped due to SSI Is this why we don't hear too much about prosecution/termination of dishonest screeners? The link isn't working, darn it! |
Originally Posted by doober
(Post 10078734)
In looking for some information re SSI, I came across a report that said prosecution of a baggage screener for theft had been dropped because information that would have been disclosed was SSI.
Prosecution of Screener dropped due to SSI Is this why we don't hear too much about prosecution/termination of dishonest screeners? The link isn't working, darn it! |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:44 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.