Stupid TSA Tricks


#1

If there is anybody out there that truly thinks that Terminally Stupid Assholes are actually protecting us from the bad guys, please RUN, do NOT walk, to your nearest psychiatrist and sign up for 1,000 hours of treatment!

Yesterday (27 Dec 08) at LAX, my girlfriend and I had several encounters with the TSA “security” agents.

  1. My girlfriend was accused of “artfully hiding” a bottle of hand creme that was 8 ounces in size. Her “artful hiding?” She did what anybody would do: she wrapped it in a piece of clothing in case that it opened it wouldn’t run all over the suitcase.

  2. She was yelled at when something fill out of the bag and she actually touched. While the regulations say that the luggage must be repacked by the ape, er, TSA agent, you don’t have to yell at the person to remind her of this.

  3. Our flight was delayed. I went outside for a cigarette. When I returned, I placed my 2 lighters in the tray to go back through security. Turns out that the local supervisor (NOT TSA regualtions) had determined that a person can only have one lighter. I talked to him for about 15 minutes. He said he couldn’t understand why someone would have more than one lighter on his person. He said that it was HIS facility and HE, not the TSA (which has no limits on common lighters) would determine how many lighters a person could have. In other words, he was a little man given authority and he abused it.

  4. A woman was told to EMPTY he baby’s milk bottle (she had the baby with her), wash it out, and then and only then could she go through security.

I tell you, we need to do something about the so-called security agency called the TSA. they are getting out of hand.


#2

Wouldn’t Zero and Never be pretty much the same?


#3

Here is a good idea, comply with the rules and STFU, they may be inept, but they are all we have right now. Why not just deal with the rules. Had they been there on 9/11/01 would those scum bags have gotten on? Who knows, but maybe they wouldn’t have tried.


#4

Well, Mr. Sheeple, we could do that. Take away our freedoms bit-by-bit and soon we have no freedoms.

What I forgot to mention about the TSA idiots is that they were so frigging worried about the “artfully hidden contraband” that they didn’t even notice another bottle of hand cream!

You want real security yet are you for profiling? Heaven forbid should the “peaceful” Muslim looking people be given the extra look. Instead, they do things like make a woman needing crutches leave her crutches behind and walk through security. The poor woman wasn’t using the crutches because they made a fashion statement. She was using them because SHE NEEDED THEM TO WALK!

Have you flown lately? The TSA is getting worse, not better. I say it’s in spite of the TSA, not because of the TSA, that we haven’t had any so-called peaceful Muslims attack our airlines. How many of the 19 Muslims were little old white ladies? Yes, I am also for us immediately breaking off diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia because many of the terrorists were from that country. We can do without their oil - just tell these environmentalist Nazis that whether the like it or not, there’s more to oil than just driving cars.

You’re suppose to pull the quart size bags with the liquids out of your baggage. NOT once in 4 flights have I been asked to take them out. The agent at LAX also said they are suppose to be 3.4 ounces or less yet the TSA web page says each container cannot be more than 3 ounces. Which is correct? The fiefdom rules by Supervisor Alexandra at LAX or the TSA upper management?

Here’s a few pages of the atrocities and idiocies by the TSA:
TSA contradicts itself with liquid/gel policy
TSA squanders millions of US tax dolllars
TSA endangers child’s life by contaminating his feeding tube despite pleas
TSA screener mistakes toy, cookie for IED
TSA Moron Mistakes Ipod Charger For Bomb Equipment
More TSA Mistakes

Yes, zero and never are the same - I was originally going to enumerate the number of individual times.


#5

Don’t get me wrong, I am all for profiling. I get it, but if we have to sacrifice a few freedoms for some added security, what’s wrong with that?

Instead of bitching and moaning about the TSA, just comply. I have never had one problem with them. I also don’t show up with a chip on my shoulder and an ax to grind. Lighten up guy, you’ll live longer. :wink:


#6

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

“Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of resistance.” Woodrow Wilson

“The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” Louis D. Brandeis

“The trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both.” Christopher Hitchens in the August, 2003 issue of Reason.

“My greatest fear is that too many members of the public will embrace the government’s call to give up some freedom in return for greater safety, only to find that they have lost freedom without gaining safety.” ACLU President Nadine Strossen, in the December, 2001 issue of Reason. (I do not like the ACLU but this guy has it right!)

"You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream – the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order – or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, ‘The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.’ " Ronald Reagan, October 27, 1964


#7

So what’s your point, should we have no security because it impinges upon your right to carry two cigarette lighters? Where do we draw the line. The world has changed a little since ole Ben Franklin walked the Earth. We give up freedoms every day for the good of the masses. That’s just the way it is. Welcome to the real world.


#8

Ever cook a lobster? Put a lobster in a boiling pot of water and it’s going to try to jump out immediately. Put it in cool water and gradually heat up the water it’s going to be cooked. In other words, I don’t want to give up the freedom to travel in order to be secure.

Today it’s lighters, matches, hand creme, unopened sodas. What will it be tomorrow? I can’t bring my computer on board because I can use it to create a bomb?

Millions of men and women have died for our freedoms. I don’t like seeing them taken away by the government in the name of “security.”


#9

So when a member of your family or a close friend is killed in the next attack due to a total lack of security (ala pre 9-11-01) don’t bitch. It’s easy to sit out there on the left coast and cry about your freedoms being taken away. How many people did you know that died on 9-11? Did you ever visit the smoking hole? Did you donate any time to dig any bodies out? How often do you have to drive by NYC and see that hole in the skyline? We drove in supplies on the second day, a whole trailer filled with many items donated to local FD’s. Never forget.

Edit: My point is, a few extra minutes in line and a little more scrutany of my items while checking in is a small price to pay for peace of mind. Flying is not a right it is a privilage. Enjoy it.


#10

I don’t know whether you are or not but this is spoken like a true liberal - you go for the extreme.

I’m all for security but not at the cost of liberty.

Had I been in the New York City area or Washington area, I would have volunteered. I appreciate the work you and others were able to do. Unfortunately, the only way I could help is by contributing money for supplies and equipment.

Every time I see a movie filmed in NYC and see the hole in the skyline, I am upset because we have allowed the terrorist to win by incrementally taking away our liberties in the name of security.

I appreciate your work in the days following

Another stupid TSA trick: Last year I had to ask a TSA supervisor to allow me to bring in two small knives in a cheese set. Both were within the guidelines. You know what this idiot did? He allowed one of the two knives - the SHARPER one just because it was a tad shorter than the other, duller one.

What we need is plain common sense. Is making a white woman with a baby empty her baby’s bottle and then wash it out going to make travel safer? I think not. Is harassing an 86 years old Medal of Honor awardee contributing to air safety? No, it is not. Is requiring general aviation jets flying to DCA to stop and pick up an air marshal at one of very few designated airports enhancing security? Probably not. Requiring a woman to remove a nipple ring with a pair of pliers a security enhancement? If you say yes, this does, then please see a doctor of psychiatry as soon as possible.


#11

This is what’s called a straw man argument.

David is right. (*****) The TSA is security theater, not security.

( ***** Hell will be frozen until further notice.)


#12

You have a better idea Dorothy? Lets hear it.

And David, I am far from a liberal (that job belongs to JHEM), but I really don’t see how complying with some basic rules for boarding a plane robs me of any of my liberties.


#13

All good examples of the extreme, for the most part the system works.


#14

That explains the sudden chill I received a few minutes ago! :slight_smile:


#15

I take back anything I’ve said about you being liberal.


#16

TSA = (Thousands Standing Around) (Tub Stackers Administration) or (Gate Rape)


#17

This point I’m going to make I don’t think is a flaw with the TSA as it is with the airlines.

When I travel I use my airport i.d. and 9 out of 10 times IF I can find it go through that airport’s employee screen point. The problem comes when I go check in and am told that I have been selected for “Further screening” at the screen point. The problem I have with that is in order to get the badge I have to work in and around the airport, I had to go through a criminal backround check to include the last 1o years of residence, and job history with their address as well, fingerprinting… BUT I require further screening.

I think one of my fond memories of the TSA would have to be the time the very expensive baggage system at IAD broke and ALL checked luggage was being sent down 1 smaller back up belt. Every carrier, and ground handler had to provide people to drive up, clear their respective bags and drop them at one of the 5 corrosponding belts for the flight. In this basement there was JetBlue, Independance Air, Lufthansa, Austrian, Air France, Alitalia. After being in the bag basement for what felt like a lifetime, this TSA joker in a suit comes up to me and tells me to stop sending bags to the belt I was dropping at, but rather to distribute them evenly accross the basement. I then told him the reason we were dropping them at the individual belt was that is where they belong. He got mad and told me to get a manager, I then informed him I was a manager, and he could use my Nextel to contact my boss, but he was fully aware of what was going on. He said stop everything…we got together with the 2 other managers from some of the other carriers and told this idiot to go back to his desk and let people who know what the hell is going on deal with the issue. God bless their pee pickin smart hearts.


#18

Bingo!

When one is in Rome, one does what the Romans do…

Now, this doesn’t mean I have a suggestion on improving the process that TSA has in place but something is better then nothing. JHEM is right, from my eyes TSA is running a security theater, but again something is better then nothing even if it’s a minimal deterrent.

If the limit is 3 oz for taking something on board like hand creme, then it’s 3 ounces, cut and dry and something very easy to comply with . Wrapping it in soft fuzzies preventing leakage doesn’t fix the violation.

Nor is the freedom taking away of taking more then 3 ounces of hand creme. Just check it in your bag, no big deal, no loss of freedom of movement. No check bag, then pretty good chance you don’t need more then 3 ounces of hand creme while enroute. If so, slather it on before going through security, take the allowable 3 ounces of hand creme with you, conform to TSA regs and just buy more at the destination

And to my knowlege as a non smoker, it only takes one lighter to light a cigarette? Out of lighter fluid, shame on one for not planning ahead.

These “restrictions” are just that, restrictions, **not prohibiting **our privilege to fly (it is a privilege, not a right) or prohibiting us from taking more then 3 ounces of hand creme in our travels or prohibition of taking one lighter. We just have to be flexible to what is asked from us as travelers.

My experiences with TSA other then the long lines really hasn’t been that bad, but I do comply with what is asked from me.

Could that really be the answer to the problem???


#19

Is it 3.0 or 3.4 ounces? The supervisor at LAX says 3.4 yet the TSA web page says 3.0.

It’s not uncommon for smokers to carry 2 lighters. I carry one in my jacket and on in my pocket most times.

I’ve gotten 5 or 6 items into the quart bag “comfortably.” What’s wrong with this picture? That’s 15 or 18 ounces of liquid. Add the same amount for my travel companion and we have more than enough to make a bomb.

Why more than 3 ounces of hand creme? How about this: It was a gift! We don’t carry check-in luggage for a short trip (in this case, 3 days). As good as Southwest is, the luggage claim at Oakland sucks - it takes a minimum of 20 minutes for the bags to begin showing up on the luggage carousel. With two of us, it’s quite easy to have nothing but carry-on luggage for a week’s trip. Why check in a bag for one highly deadly weapon like hand creme?

Traveling is not a privilege. It is a right. Driving a car, operating a business, getting married: those all privileges because you need to get a license from the government. Last time I checked you don’t need a license to fly as a passenger in an airliner. You do not need a license to enter the “secured” gate area, although you will be given extra attention by the so-called security agents before being allowed in.


#20

Traveling is a right. The privilege is taking an airline. You do have choices of using a car, bicycle, walking, bus, train or crawling on all fours, therefore your right of traveling has not been taken away.

Rule is 3 ounces, 1 quart size 1 bag per person. The full potential of the capacity of quart size bag does not change the rule.

Even if one says it’s 3.4 ounces and another says its’ 3 ounces, that isn’t the point. This descrepancy of the rule has not impinged on your right to travel no matter what the discrepancy may be.

Two very simple options. Either comply with the rules given to you to use the privilege of using a commercial airline or use your right to select another mode of transportation to travel. Not very complex choices in my opinion. Actually a third option is available. Be the captain of your own ship and go work on getting a PPL if flying is desired. Then you can fly with gallons of hand creme if so desired.

No matter how many lighters you carry, you only need one to light a cigarette. Easy math in my eyes.

As far as gifts, if it doesn’t meet the 3-1-1 rule guidelines imposed, that’s what FEDEX, USPS or UPS is for. They all include tracking and insurance if so desired… Better then checking it in luggage.