Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 252 posts

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#191

Post by Arch-TK »

Auracle wrote: post #159
Arch-TK wrote: post #47

Recently at Stansted I had an encounter with a security staff member who was of the opinion that both clotted cream and butter were liquids. (Note, I wasn't the one trying to get either of these onto the plane.) Her entire argument seemed to rest on the case that they were spreadable. I don't think she did well in GCSE physics.

So, this is the TSA but: “TSA classifies items that you can spill, spread, spray, pump or pour as needing to be 3.4 ounces or smaller to fit into a 3-1-1 bag,” TSA spokesperson Lisa Farbstein said. “There has been no change in the categorization of any of these items, including peanut butter, which is a spreadable and thus falls under the 3.4-ounce limit.” Apparently “spreadable” is one of the criteria. I’d argue any…

>I’d argue anything is spreadable if you try hard enough.

That's exactly what I said.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#192

Post by onlypositive »

vlovich123 wrote: post #184
meghan_rain wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but to their defense, there have not been 9/11 attacks or anything remotely similar since 9/11... so either it was all fake anyways or the security theater also deters potential low IQ attackers?

My snark aside, you’re missing a totally other reasonable explanation. Prior to 9/11 hijackings were relatively safe affairs. They would land and negotiate for money / demands and release passengers unharmed. So sitting passively was the safest approach, Post 9/11 the cockpit is completely locked down (regulatory requirement for flights to/from US) and passengers know that any hijacking might be a suicide attacker an…

Don't worry, the TSA has inserted itself into overseas airports too.

When travelling to the US we get subjected to random/targeted searches in the gating area by US TSA staff before being allowed to board.

This is after our own typical screening and scanning.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#193

Post by Cerium »

grecy wrote: post #171
deegles wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to throw away my nice Leatherman Micra (because of the tiny blade) at an airport because I forgot it was in my carry on, only to sit at a restaurant next to the gate and be given a full size serrated steak knife with my meal...

If you have time, you can go backwards out to the regular airport and mail yourself anything you don't want to throw away.

My only experience here was outside of the US, but once when screening found a pair of scissors in my carry on I did this. They gave me a lanyard to let me use the crew line to get back to the front of screening so it didn't take much time.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#194

Post by orangepurple »

HopenHeyHi wrote: post #150
zidad wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't associate with trouble makers, that's your racist bias. I work with palestinian students and software developers.

It is a degrees of separation thing. Logically derived and proven to be effective. Very hard to argue with the last part. I understand how someone who has been inconvienced might perceive it differently but that in and of itself is by design and "priced in" as the goal is not to make 100% of travelers feel good but rather keep 100% of travelers safe.

What????

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#195

Post by acomjean »

shever73 wrote: post #162
deegles wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to throw away my nice Leatherman Micra (because of the tiny blade) at an airport because I forgot it was in my carry on, only to sit at a restaurant next to the gate and be given a full size serrated steak knife with my meal...

The same thing happened to me with my Leatherman Micra. I have come to the conclusion that most airport security measures are props designed to make us believe that we are safer.

I’ve been there too. Forgetting to take it off my keychain.

For those not familiar it’s a keychain multi-tool. Mine had scissors. But it also has a really short blade. It’s sharp but really small. No worse than knitting needles..

https://www.leatherman.com/micra-20.html

I usually carry on my slr camera and lenses. And they poke through my bag. One time they detected something. So the tsa agent is asking me about something metal and T shaped. But they won’t let me near my bag. It was a portable microphone. I remember the agent checking my bag holding it up to the scanner persons and yelling, “it’s a microphone”

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#196

Post by ultrasaurus »

Arrath wrote: post #179
yamtaddle wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once lost a 3/4 full normal-size tube of toothpaste because of one of these limits. Made me wonder how paste-like something has to not count as a liquid to them. Playdough? How closely do they look at deodorant? Some stick-form ones are more liquid than toothpaste is.

Thanks to the TSA holding the power, at the very least in the "Well if you have a dispute with my ruling just step to the side and I'll get my manager, hope they wander over before your flight leaves..." way, I have in fact had TSA agents take away my stick deodorant before.

I had never really thought of that, but the ability to make you miss a flight is an amazingly strong coercive power relative to the stakes.

The x-ray scanners usually have bold signs on them instructing you how to opt out. But if you do, they act as slowly as possible to ensure you never do it again.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#197

Post by acomjean »

kalleboo wrote: post #27

In Japan for domestic flights, they have some sort of a sniffer machine they put your liquids on for testing, so flying with them is fine. When I flew through Beijing and had forgotten a can of beer in my backpack (<3 Julebryg), it was flagged on the X-ray, and when they guy found it, saw "it was just a can of beer", he gave it back to me. I guess that works too.

I was in Denver about 10 years ago and went through the human size "sniffing" machine.

It was weird. I was the only one in line and they sent me through. You can keep shoes and belts on. Ushered into a telephone booth sized device. It had doors on both sides and puffed me with air. 10 or 20 seconds later the green light came the door opened and I walked out.

(I guess they're called "puffer machines") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffer_machine

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#198

Post by marssaxman »

ultrasaurus wrote: post #196
Arrath wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks to the TSA holding the power, at the very least in the "Well if you have a dispute with my ruling just step to the side and I'll get my manager, hope they wander over before your flight leaves..." way, I have in fact had TSA agents take away my stick deodorant before.

I had never really thought of that, but the ability to make you miss a flight is an amazingly strong coercive power relative to the stakes. The x-ray scanners usually have bold signs on them instructing you how to opt out. But if you do, they act as slowly as possible to ensure you never do it again.

I opt out every time - I've never used the scanners - and the delay has never been long enough to make me miss a flight.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#199

Post by nirav72 »

bombcar wrote: post #121
a2tech wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a jobs program for the unemployable. That and political pork. The TSA is a complete failure at every level and is laughably bad at everything but draining money from the taxpayer and stepping on citizens rights. We should go back to metal detectors staffed by airport provided staff and scan checked bags for bombs (which is something that actually kind of works).

It’s well known that those who can’t cut it to be police will go be prison guards. And the ones who can’t even meet that bar end up at TSA.

To become a cop in the U.S in most places , there is already a low bar for entry. All one needs is a high school diploma (or ged) , no felony conviction and about 3 months training.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#200

Post by dtech »

0xDEF wrote: post #32
mdrachuk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There also wasn’t a 9/11 before the 9/11.

There were dozens of terror attacks against air travel in the 80s and 90s. The global post-9/11 "security theater" did make flying in the developing world much safer.

The TSA checks are ineffective, they fail detection 95% of the time [1]. That's a pretty good indication that it's security theater.

Personally, I'd expect the decrease to be mostly attributable to increased cockpit access security like locked reinforced doors.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-breaches-...

Post reply on HN