SaintLouisFlier

I was seriously alarmed last Wednesday when I was traveling back to the USA from Mexico. In BOTH Cancun AND Puerto Vallarta my bag was not actually checked for any liquids. I was only ASKED if I had any liquids or gels. In fact, I had put the liquids in the required baggy, but it was inside of the pocket on the carry on bag and not visible. While a man DID open the main part of my bag before I boarded through the jetway, he did not bother to unzip my carry-on pockets where the liquids were at all. Upon my arrival home, I found a LARGE bottle of hair gel and full-sized tube of toothpaste that I had forgotten all about in my rush to pack which was not caught at all by anyone on the Mexico side of the border. The security in Mexico is seriously lacking. At the check-in counter in PVR, I put my carry-on bag on a table in front of the USAirways ticket counter and prepared to open it for a "security woman." The woman there asked if I had any food or liquids. I said that I did not. She waved me through without a look inside of my bag at all. While my bag WAS x-rayed at the security checkpoint, the man there was not even looking at the screen and was chatting with a female co-worker, so that is no doubt how my large bottle of hair gel and full-sized tube of toothpaste made it through without any issues. There was also a large sign at the checkpoint in Cancun in English only that stated, "DO NOT REMOVE YOUR SHOES!" It was pretty disturbing to think what we are allowing into our borders and on aircraft flying at least from Mexico to the USA daily.

I WAS scanned upon arrival at BOTH Cancun and Puerto Vallarta with a heat sensing camera by a very official looking person in a lab coat for H1N1 flu, but that was it.

ralfp

They were checking for actual threats, not imagined ones. What's the problem?

gj83

Wirelessly posted (HTC-P4600/1.2 Opera/9.50 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en) UP.Link/6.3.1.20.0)

...and your plane still made it?

the TSA is very reacionary and just reacts instead of actually protcting us.

SaintLouisFlier

Nevertheless, some consistancy would be good. I would rather have proactive security than reactive security. The fact is that the gel might not have been gel, nor the toothpaste, toothpaste. The man was not even looking at the X-Ray screen, nor was my bag actually checked. The one agent took my word for it, which seems a bit absurd. My plane DID make it, yes, but do I want to actually rely on that type of insane logic to be on an aircraft with a liquid explosive that was not detected due to neglect? Do I want these planes flying over my home and blowing up in flight? What caused the Air France flight to go down in the Atlantic from Rio to Paris? We may never know, but I would like to think that it had nothing to do with security... or the lack thereof. Flippant replies to a genuine concern are just a reflection of imagined safety because you may fly a lot. All it takes is one bomb to get through on your plane... just one. The fact that a drunk driver may get home safely does not take away the fact that the driver was a real threat to himself or others on the road and was not caught by police. The threat still existed and does not diminish because the threat was not "caught." So, do we just give up on looking for drunks driving because nobody got injured that time or forgo airport security and say that USA security measures are way overboard while the lack of security I saw in Mexico is fine because obviously nothing "happened?" I think not.... Security has to be premptive... and I don't mind a bit of inconvienence to know that at least one threat to my safety is being monitored and my chance of a safe arrival is increased because of that fact.

ralfp

The TSA has allowed criminals access to checked bags thousands of times (every time something is stolen from a checked bag), yet they do not seem to care. They're lucky the criminals have not yet decided to put a bomb into a bag.

The TSA is not a paragon of security.

Never forget that you are the one who is being treated as a threat.

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

halls120

Our resident TSO KA drinkers must be salivating while reading your post.

I've passed through TSA checkpoints more than once with containers of liquid in my carry-on that no one noticed.

Perhaps the security in Mexico is as bad as you portray. However, I suspect they have recognized that they should spend more time looking for items that might actually pose a threat to aviation security, not for some one in a million freak occurrence.

If anyone really wants to bring down an airliner in midair, they aren't going to do it by mixing exotic liquids they've smuggled in their carry on.

Jebby_ca

What consistency? The TSA is the most inconsistent group there is! And everything is SSI, so you can't even challenge their inconsistencies...

The TSA is REACTIVE, not proactive. Note how they implemented the shoe and liquids theatre AFTER someone tried something with their shoes and liquids.

Australia allows full sized liquids domestically... how many Australian airliners have you heard about being blown up in the sky by liquid explosives? You hear about drunk driving related fatalities every day in the media. The two cannot be compared. Liquid explosives, as many have already pointed out on this board, are not a credible threat. Drunk driving is. Heck, there was a thread here on FT a while back about boycotting Canada because of how harshly they treat those with drunk driving convictions, even after some time had passed.

What's to stop someone from setting off liquid explosives in a mall? If you're willing to put up with a bit of inconvenience, maybe there should be a checkpoint outside every house, so you're searched for any prohibited/illegal items before you can leave in the morning. Just in case you have a bomb in your shoe or a water bottle in your backpack. You can't be too careful, you know...

coachrowsey

Took the words out of my mouth^

AngryMiller

I had an early morning flight from Mexico City to the US around a month or so ago and was pleasantly surprised at how polite security was towards passengers. They appeared to be looking for real threats.

A big ^^^ to Mexico City airport staff.

coachrowsey

Folks, this is the key to the whole ball of wax that our "good friend" Ron & other TSA folks will never understand. CUT THE STUPID NONSENSE CRAP.

tev9999

Any passenger on your flight could have had a pound of C4 explosive shoved up their rectum. Do you really want security to say "drop your pants, bend over, and spread 'em". TSA is for show only, not real security. (Watch the movie "Man on Fire" for a (fictional) example of what I am talking about).

Spiff

The so-called "liquids threat" is a big fat lie. Stealing your shampoo and toothpaste would have done nothing to mitigate this nonexistent "threat".

Please, feel free to name a single (just one!) "liquid explosive" that can be synthesized airside out of components not readily detectable by Explosives Trace Detection and/or without laboratory conditions. Please, name one.

TSA is lying about liquids being a credible threat. TSA is managed by scumbags.

coachrowsey

Ron will be along soon to take care of that for you

spd476

At Punta Cana, Dominican Republic they didn't ask about liquids and permitted them on the plane. It was a nice change from flying in the US. Right before the security checkpoint, the gargabe cans were overflowing with soda and water bottles because people have been taught that liquids are evil. My wife and I carried our sodas right through the checkpoint and nobody said a word.

I felt perfectly safe getting on the plane and it managed to make it to ATL safely. Of course, at ATL, the silly rules and restrictions were back in place.

Spiff

Vague references to magic and other figments of the imagination does not constitute "taking care of that" in any kind of credible way. There's also the long track record of zero credibility on other issues that pretty much sinks the Believability Ship in the harbor.