Get a life - security is for everyone including 86 year olds!

[simongr]

What besides the fact that these restrictions are a joke? No nail scissors, not nail clippers with 15 mm nail files attached. But they happily let me carry on a dozen, large, empty, glass beer bottles. When you see the english pub brawl in movies, they're not jamming nail scissors in peoples faces saying "stitch this jimmy"

And the liquid - They have worked out that it takes about 1 litre of the liquid explosive to bring down an aircraft. You do the maths on how big the little plastic bag is.

I think you missed my point - every day people ignorant of the restrictions get caught out by them which indicates that people don't bother to check the rules of flying before they fly.

In response to your off topic comment - I find the restrictions annoying, pathetic and pointless - nonetheless I abide by them as I do not run the agency advising the Aus Govt on the security rules to apply for travellers.

 

[medhead]

I think you missed my point - every day people ignorant of the restrictions get caught out by them which indicates that people don't bother to check the rules of flying before they fly.

In response to your off topic comment - I find the restrictions annoying, pathetic and pointless

Well, that is one reason for the situation in the OP. (I did get your point)

Another reason (my point) is, as I mentioned, that the restrictions are as you say pointless. So people who don't fly and don't check the rules apply the common sense test in the context of their everyday life. Hence they get caught out.

If security had of used some common sense in dealing with the situation then there would not have been a story and they still could have protected the flying public.

(Sorry for not joining the dots from my point to the topic in my previous post - it was late)

 

[simongr]

Another reason (my point) is, as I mentioned, that the restrictions are as you say pointless. So people who don't fly and don't check the rules apply the common sense test in the context of their everyday life. Hence they get caught out.

But common sense would also dictate that people should find out what is required when flying rather than assuming it is just like getting on a bus.

 

[medhead]

But common sense would also dictate that people should find out what is required when flying rather than assuming it is just like getting on a bus.

Well, common sense to people on here would dictate that.

Common sense is judged against your experiences. For people who don't fly and don't read newspapers (there are a lot of people like that) their common sense tells them that toothpaste is not a bomb and neither is grandma's wheelchair.

 

[simongr]

That's not the point - the point is common sense would dictate that people would find out about what they should do prior to travel and prepare for that.

 

[Evan]

I think you missed my point - every day people ignorant of the restrictions get caught out by them which indicates that people don't bother to check the rules of flying before they fly.

Maybe, maybe not... as an expereinced flyer i have twice been caught out.

1.) scissors in a bag i grabbed at the last minute from work. just threw them out. Opps. No big deal
2.) Deorderant at LHR .... 100grams = more than 100ml, sure i can understand this and actually knew this in advance but never had an issue even the 3 other times through LHR in the preceeding 3 weeks. Had a discussions with the guy because we was very rude, reported him since he was so rude, arrogant and could not tell me what the conversion rate was, just said 100grams = more than 100ml and i could not take it with me. (Airside all they sold was 100gram cans !)

Anyway for all who want to know for deoderant the conversion is...
61 grams = 100 ml (atleast according to the security at LHR)

E

 

[vt]

As with many things, Ignorance is not a defence. On things like taxation, the law and in this case air travel, the person involved should figure it out themselves or ask someone.

 

[medhead]

That's not the point - the point is common sense would dictate that people would find out about what they should do prior to travel and prepare for that.

Actually it is entirely the point. People make a judgement of what is sensiable based on their experiences.

This guy no doubt thought it is not sensible to make a old, immobile lady stand up and take her shoes off. Where in the security rules does it say you have to be able to take your shoes off standing up?

Lets take my grandfathers example. He packed his insulin and needles in his checked for his all day journey from BNE to Karratha, because he read the rules and blindly followed them, without even thinking they must make exemptions for personal safety. His common sense is a lot different to mine or yours, but he followed the rules

Here is another prime example.

2.) Deorderant at LHR .... 100grams = more than 100ml, sure i can understand this and actually knew this in advance but never had an issue even the 3 other times through LHR in the preceeding 3 weeks. Had a discussions with the guy because we was very rude, reported him since he was so rude, arrogant and could not tell me what the conversion rate was, just said 100grams = more than 100ml and i could not take it with me. (Airside all they sold was 100gram cans !)

Anyway for all who want to know for deoderant the conversion is...
61 grams = 100 ml (atleast according to the security at LHR)

E

Evan was only caught out by a security naz_ not by the liquids rules.

Common sense says that 100 ml = 100 gram, if only for ease of conversion. And you know checking the requirements back this up. If we look at qantas's outline they say 100 ml is approximately 100 gm and for travel via LHR they say that 100ml = 3.3 oz = 93 gm.

Flying with Us - Before You Travel - Baggage - Carry on - Country Specific

The BAA site doesn't say anything about weight

BAA: Airport security - Latest advice for passengers

This security guy is wrong. Technically everything has varying specific gravities. But they don't list a thousand and one conversions for all the different products. They just say 100 ml. Are we supposed to guess that 100 ml of deoderant is really 61 gm? NO!

As with many things, Ignorance is not a defence. On things like taxation, the law and in this case air travel, the person involved should figure it out themselves or ask someone.

There is a law against people in wheelchairs flying? Ignorance of the law doesn't come into this at all.

 

[serfty]

Coming through LGA recently my wife was aghast that an old lady of sub-continental origins was getting the SSSS treatment while sitting in a wheel chair.

She did not think it OK that she has been singled out for such; I advised her that the SSSS was probably randomly applied and would have been done without any reference to age, infirmity or aboriginality. I also asked her whether only people young and fit should be searched thus. It took some convincing.

 

[munitalP]

This security guy is wrong. Technically everything has varying specific gravities. But they don't list a thousand and one conversions for all the different products. They just say 100 ml. Are we supposed to guess that 100 ml of deoderant is really 61 gm? NO!

You got to the maths before I did - I was going to say near the same as above. Being from an electrical engineering background I guess that simple conversions such as 100G = 0.0001 tonne, 1 tonne of H2O = 1000l, 1000l = 1,0000,000 millilitres therefore 1l = 1000ml, 100ml = 100g... phew... are taken for granted...

Thats water... As medhead rightly pointed out, specific gravity now plays a part, for example, oil is lighter than water therefore the maths changes slightly or a chemical such as acetone is heaver than water and again the maths changes....

Just to confuse the issue further, temperature also plays a part of the equation... hmmmm

So, if your perfume is Musk for example, that has a specific gravity of 0.085 at 25 deg C. What does that mean? Well.... The next time at LHR and the security naz_ takes the purfume, you need to baffle him with maths - it would also be relevant to ask the sales person when you buy the purfume for a MSDS (material safety data sheet) which will list the SG of the purfume...


Mr!

 

[thegurio]

I agree entirely with everyone else... It seems to me that the first mules that drug runners etc would use are the ones that attract enough attention but not the wrong kind, such as cute babies in prams, old ladies in wheelchairs etc. Easiest place to hide stuff and least likely to look. For me it seems strange that people won't research where they are going and what is needed to do when they get there and that includes airports rules etc.

It seems though that the general travelling public hasn't been informed enough as some people i was standing next to in OOL were talking about a trip to MEL and that they could only have 100ml liquids etc. and even with myself, you hear bits and pieces around the traps but nothing terribly definitive.

Once again, good on you security, the same rules for EVERYONE no matter who they are!

 

[munitalP]

This thread was very close to being closed down - in fact, it was closed down until a mod decided to give it another chance - come one everyone, don't take personal shots at each other (the questionable posts have been removed). This is a serious subject which affects everyone of us who travels - as far as I am concerned, nobody escapes security - that was the jist of the thread topic -

thanks to Dave for re-opening the thread


Mr!

 

[medhead]

Once again, good on you security, the same rules for EVERYONE no matter who they are!

Despite the dodgy News Corp reporting, I didn't read a story about people objecting to the screening. The underlying problem is the respect shown by security in carrying out the screening. I agree that the rules must be applied evenly to prevent the diversions you mentioned.

However, there is the matter of how the screening is carried out. They did not have to screening the old person the way they did. They could have handled the situation better and still carried out all the required tests. If security had of been more respectful in their treatment of her then IMO there would not have been a story in the paper.

For me the story highlights a lack of proper training of the security staff to deal with a difficult situation. Which is a real surprise as except for one jumped up thing in ADL I've always found them to be polite and professional. Even for the 15 times I was "randomly" selected in a row.

 

[thegurio]

True, but then again how many times have you gone to a Cafe, Restaurant, servo etc. and thought that the person who served you didnt care about anything especially you... Well around here it happens a lot and i think that is the same everywhere. It happens because people don't try and find a way to enjoy themselves at work. Work is boring and if asked we wouldn't choose to do it however there is always two ways to do something and you may as well do it the enjoyable way as you spend far more time at work than do anywhere else.

 

[medhead]

Yeah exactly. "work is boring". But then I'm a big boy, with broad shoulders and News Corp are not going to do a story about me being disrespected. But do it to a poor little old lady in a wheelchair.....

The funny thing is the old lady has probably had a good go at her son for complaining - "why'd you complain, I lived thought the war you know, we didn't have no wheelchairs back then. If you couldn't walk you died. I once had to stand up for 3 days and nights without even one cup of tea. Wheelchairs - Shear luxury!"

 

[munitalP]

The funny thing is the old lady has probably had a good go at her son for complaining - "why'd you complain, I lived thought the war you know, we didn't have no wheelchairs back then. If you couldn't walk you died. I once had to stand up for 3 days and nights without even one cup of tea. Wheelchairs - Shear luxury!"

Mr!

 

[JohnK]

I don't think anyone should be exempt from random security searches although I am not convinced about the accuracy of the machinery that is used to detect metal on a person.

Once in a blue moon I have to take my shoes off although my belt has never triggered the machine. Sometimes the pile of medicines, there is a tiny amount of aluminium foil used to seal the tablets/pills, I have in my shirt pocket triggers the machine. Sometimes my wallet triggers the machine.

The other day in Brisbane I had a pile of coins in my pocket that did not trigger the machine. When I got through I remembered they were in my pocket and when I mentioned this to the security guard he said that sometimes a few coins do not trigger the machine. I had way more than a few coins in my pocket. I know I am not going to cause any damage with the coins but if these got through then what else is getting through?

Are we any safer having this much security? Well there hasn't been an incident in a few years. So are we safe? Who knows? Sure the random searches may turn up something interesting but these only cover a very small percentage of travellers.

Before too long the terrorists will find new ways to cause havoc on board an aircraft. And as security gets more sophisticated the type of weapon at the disposal of the terrorist also gets more sophisticated. They just need to find a way to get it on board the aircraft. And they will....

 

[Evan]

Coins being non ferus (sp) metal will not be detected like anything like iron
E

 

[straitman]

The machines do have varying, selectable levels of intensity of screening. Any normally used setting will on most occasions trigger an alarm. They can be set to exempt or be less sensitive to different levels of the body so it is not unusual for the shoe setting to be lower than elsewhere on the body.

 

[anat0l]

Deorderant at LHR .... 100grams = more than 100ml, sure i can understand this and actually knew this in advance but never had an issue even the 3 other times through LHR in the preceeding 3 weeks. Had a discussions with the guy because we was very rude, reported him since he was so rude, arrogant and could not tell me what the conversion rate was, just said 100grams = more than 100ml and i could not take it with me. (Airside all they sold was 100gram cans !)

Lucky for me my roll-on deodorant specifically writes on the label "100mL", not grams!

I was always scared about that thing - what if your liquid/gel/etc. is measured in mass, not volume? Toothpaste is a classic example - it is almost always in grams, not mL. I have a travel toothpaste of size 75g. Passable? Scientifically it's debatable. But I've gotten away with it so far. Considering that there are SSSS freaks out there that can't think to save their own mother, I mightn't be so lucky next time.

I wish they would make some nice accessories that are 100mL or less. Otherwise, one has to do without a full cleaning set when travelling only carry-on, or has to retain lots of 100mL bottles and squeeze contents in when required.