April 28, 2006
Transportation Safety Administration Commentary
The Transportation Safety Administration is charged with ensuring the security of Americans as they travel on public modes of transportation, and especially by air. As I travel, I regularly witness and am subject to TSA actions that do not contribute to this goal. Rather than advise the TSA on security issues, I'll post here instead.
Americans, keep your shoes on!
Posted by Pat at 02:09 PM
August 10, 2006
Air Travel Security Hysteria
Dear Senator Kennedy:
I listened with dismay as the radio reported that, because of the actions of some Pakistani women flying out of London, US air travelers are no longer being permitted to bring liquids, such as toiletries and cosmetics, aboard aircraft.
The detailed searches of travelers has caused significant and substantial delays getting past security checkpoints. The added burden of needing to pick up checked luggage also adds significantly to travel time (in fact, it took 45 minutes for my bag to reach the Delta baggage claim at Logan just a few weeks ago).
There is clearly a national hysteria about air travel that, combined with people's inability to accept unavoidable but reasonable risk in their lives' activities, has reached a point of being overly burdensome. The prospect of waiting one or two hours to pass through a security checkpoint on a flight I'm taking this Sunday represents, to me, a significant loss of liberty. I can't spend that time with family or friends, I can't engage in any useful or enjoyable activities, and I won't be able to go to church.
The current administration is determined to capitalize on peoples' fears exacerbated by unfortunate events such as that in London on Thursday morning. However, critical thought must reach the conclusion that the arguably false security gained by stripping travelers of toiletries, even lip balm, that may be needed in flight or carried on to avoid baggage claim, cannot possibly justify the human cost of tens of thousands of hours of people's lives each day--time that can neither be reclaimed nor used to anybody's benefit.
We need an approach to air travel security that does not incur the human cost of our current policies, and that is fueled by rational thought instead of raw fear. This is a complicated problem without an easy solution, but I hope you will seize any opportunities that arise to begin making a difference here.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Patrick Madden
Posted by Pat at 11:00 PM
August 13, 2006
Yes Lipstick, No Lip Balm
The TSA has made it clear they will permit airline passengers to carry lipstick; however, they are not allowing passengers to carry lip balm. This is nothing short of perverse, because lipstick substantially shares ingredients with lip balm.
About lipstick, Wikipedia says:
A typical lipstick contains many chemical ingredients, principally pigments, oils, waxes, and emollients.
About lip balm, Wikipedia says:
The balm is usually manufactured from beeswax, petroleum jelly, menthol, camphor, scented oils, and various other ingredients.
Clearly TSA policy is misguided. If they deem lip balm to be a threat due to its oils, then they must also treat lipstick as a threat due to its oils. We won't see this happen because it wouldn't be politically expedient to deprive women of their lipstick. However, the commonality of ingredients seems to suggest clearly that if a tube of Blistex will help an airplane turn into a ball of flame, then so will a tube of lipstick.
Either way, it seems like the TSA is reaching pretty far out on a limb on this one.
Posted by Pat at 12:20 AM
They actually *didn't* lie to me about shoes today
For quite some time, the TSA screeners, assisted by the media, perpetuated the myth that travelers needed to remove their shoes as part of the security screening process. The screeners internalized this misperception to the point that I've had debates with them over it, despite very clear messages from the TSA's web site that travelers are not required to remove footwear.
Imagine my "surprise" when, yet again, a screener at Boston's Logan International Airport, made this same claim.
As I have done for some time, I informed the screener today that "I'm not required to remove my shoes." I do this for a variety of reasons: I've smelled other peoples' feet (not by my choice) at security, and I hope not to subject others to whatever scent my own feet may give off; who knows what diseases cover others' feet, waiting to latch onto me; and, I resent being compelled by the government to remove clothing as a condition of travel. Yesterday, I printed the pages from the TSA's web site that clearly state "Travelers are NOT REQUIRED to remove their shoes".
Once I explained my concern about disease to the screener's supervisor, she informed me, "we just got notice that the rules changed an hour ago." Yeah, right, I've been outright lied to by TSA screeners enough times to recognize this load by its smell a mile away. However, given the capricious nature of the TSA's rules and the unease about the Pakistanis in London, I gave this claim the benefit of the doubt as the screener supervisor allowed me to pass through the metal detector then sit to remove my shoes (and I kept my feet off the floor).
Once I had a chance to revisit the TSA's web site, I saw that the policy had indeed changed. Travelers are now required to remove their shoes.
This leaves me wondering: since there haven't been any successful shoe-based hijackings at least since Richard Reid (pathetic slob) got caught trying, and the TSA has had plenty of time to ponder this particular threat, what could be the motivation here? I note that the TSA has banned gel insoles (don't get mad at me, I might stomp my foot and teach you a lesson!), and I'm wondering if forced shoe removal is the only way they can check the insoles? But then, the screeners still aren't looking at the actual shoes. If I store lipstick inside my shoe sole, will I be arrested? Gotta wonder.
Despite my issues this morning, I still held up the line for less time than the couple who didn't know what boarding passes were when the screener asked for them.
Posted by Pat at 10:18 PM
August 15, 2006
Easing Up
Okay, so I'm reading the news reports about the TSA's ban on liquids, and things have gotten better slightly. They apparently read my comment about lip balm versus lipstick, and now they're allowing lip balm onto planes.
I didn't comment about the inability for me to carry saline solution to keep from getting nosebleeds from dry air, but they must have heard about this as well and are now explicitly allowing saline solutions, up to 4 oz.
Am I happy? No, I'm still required to take off my shoes. I am happier though. However, I'm not holding my breath for a technology solution to liquid scanning.
Stay tuned.
Posted by Pat at 06:57 PM
January 17, 2007
TSA Experience: January 2, 2007
What would a trip be without a TSA encounter? Probably more pleasant.
As fate would have it, not only did I forget to remove my plastic zip-top bag of liquid, gel, paste, and wax toiletries from my carry-on bag, but the x-ray screener decided that my portable printer looked threatening enough to have it manually examined. So, both of my carry-on items were brought over for Linda 08484 to paw through. She enlisted the help of Eddie, whose badge number I didn't have a chance to memorize.
Horrors. I attempted bringing a 4.5 ounce tube of Biotene toothpaste onto an airplane, along with an ostensibly oversized container of Gillette gel antiperspirant.
Linda 08484 was not happy with this. She pulled out the toothpaste and antiperspirant and said they were too big. In reality I hadn't paid that much attention to the container sizes of my toiletries, noting that they were mostly used up. The toothpaste most clearly had less than an ounce left, and the deodorant was half full. Linda 08484 was unpersuaded by these points, so I asked for a supervisor. Amazingly, one came over promptly and was unsympathetic with my need to take these personal care products onto the plane with me. Eddie, who had been in the background swabbing my printer for explosive residue, pointed out the signs explaining the limitations and told me I should check the TSA web site while packing if I had questions.
The last time I checked the TSA web site, it told me I didn't need to remove my shoes to pass through the metal detector, yet when I passed through a metal detector ten hours later, I was forced to remove my shoes if I wanted to pass through the checkpoint. Eddie was unsympathetic to the frustration I experienced with the TSA's web site not accurately reflecting its policies.
Eddie explained to me that Logan needs to hold to higher standards because that's where the 9/11 hijackers flew from. I told Eddie the only standards he has to hold to are the ones required by the TSA. In telling me what he did, Eddie unwittingly implied that a lesser degree of screening zealotry is in place at other airports. Because the TSA would have Americans believe that the more thorough the screening, the more secure we are, Eddie also unwittingly implied that travelers at other airports aren't as safe. This is not the message the TSA should be sending to anybody.
The net result is that my toothpaste and deodorant were confiscated and I got on my plane, throughly disgruntled.
I later went to the TSA web site and reviewed their policies in detail. Of course, Linda 08484 and Eddie were correct enforcing them by confiscating my necessary toiletries.
One other interesting thing I learned is that the TSA does not restrict the quantity of medically necessary substances carried aboard, and they list some specific items...saline solution, saline spray, KY jelly, medic.... wait, KY Jelly? In whose world is this substance medically necessary? In whose world is there a greater medical imperative to have sex than there is to keep one's teeth clean and free of disease?
I have another flight next week. I am going to pack several 1 oz tubes of toothpaste to see what reaction this provokes, and I am going to bring the monster size of KY Jelly, also to see the screeners' reactions. This ought to be interesting.
Posted by Pat at 12:52 PM | Comments (0)