FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Airport security?!
Airport security?!
Jump to: Newest in thread
I got a half empty hair product container taken of me cause at 150mls it exceeded the rules.
even though I knew a reasonable debate would not be welcome with them, I asked when it's half empty (which could be verified) why still deny it?
Answer given : was people could smuggle lots of 100mls liquids past them and arrange to organize to meet an have a lot of this liquid in a bigger container.
I had 2 futile responses to this:
1- so was she telling me your job is redundant and your not making the plane anymore secure given less than 100mls of bad liquid in a fancy aftershave bottle will go unspotted???!
2- despite taking my 150ml container away can every single person walking through not just hit a duty free/costa/wh smith once through an buy a container - say a bottle of water (free with a newspaper woooo) and the risk still exists with many bad people adding there 100mls together???
The answer to both....move along sir. (fearing is only made my chances of flying worse I did just that!) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
More importantly, going on that logic, surely they must also be concerned that if opened and half used that whatever you may intend to mix it with could then make said liquid a bad liquid. And if , following that logic, how the hell are you meant to bring unused toiletries of any size home again?? Because surely the size of the bottle shouldn't really matter, only the contents. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There was a time when you could freely walk on the roofs of the departure gates buildings at Manchester Airport, and maybe others.
I wonder what changed? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"More importantly, going on that logic, surely they must also be concerned that if opened and half used that whatever you may intend to mix it with could then make said liquid a bad liquid. And if , following that logic, how the hell are you meant to bring unused toiletries of any size home again?? Because surely the size of the bottle shouldn't really matter, only the contents. "
Pack them in your hold luggage and you can take what ever size you desire, as long as it is not on the restricted items list. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More importantly, going on that logic, surely they must also be concerned that if opened and half used that whatever you may intend to mix it with could then make said liquid a bad liquid. And if , following that logic, how the hell are you meant to bring unused toiletries of any size home again?? Because surely the size of the bottle shouldn't really matter, only the contents.
Pack them in your hold luggage and you can take what ever size you desire, as long as it is not on the restricted items list."
Fair enough, On this occasion I didn't have any hold luggage, it did cross my mind if I had the time to check in my one item of hair gel and enjoy watching the attendant wonder how to stick the final destination label lol
Oh and to the comment above, yeah it surprised me that they had no clue about any liquids less than 100mls coming through. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If you remember 9/11 then why bother trying to bring any liquids on to a flight?
*Baffled
......apart from the finest Irish whiskey in a hip flask, that is!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I guess it's hard to measure exactly if the container is larger. I take cheap and cheerful toiletries abroad so I just leave them behind when I come back.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I guess it's hard to measure exactly if the container is larger. I take cheap and cheerful toiletries abroad so I just leave them behind when I come back.
"
Right, no more making sense, please! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's been well documented, ever since that Dr bloke drive into Glasgow airport that you can only take 100ml of any liquid onto a plane in hand luggage and that this 100ml has to be in a 100ml bottle, not just left in a bigger one.
Items in duty free go through security checks etc before they go on sale which is why you can buy them after going through security. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you remember 9/11 then why bother trying to bring any liquids on to a flight?
*Baffled
......apart from the finest Irish whiskey in a hip flask, that is! "
Not sure what part liquids played in 9/11?
However, the size of containers is of little importance if 3 of you can take 5 x 100ml on board each 
Has always seemed a way to get us to buy drinks at extortionate rates 'airside'.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you remember 9/11 then why bother trying to bring any liquids on to a flight?
*Baffled
......apart from the finest Irish whiskey in a hip flask, that is!
Not sure what part liquids played in 9/11?
However, the size of containers is of little importance if 3 of you can take 5 x 100ml on board each
Has always seemed a way to get us to buy drinks at extortionate rates 'airside'. "
Really, - you cannot relate limiting liquids to 9/11? Do you think they're scared of people freaking out on copious amounts of conditioner?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you remember 9/11 then why bother trying to bring any liquids on to a flight?
*Baffled
......apart from the finest Irish whiskey in a hip flask, that is!
Not sure what part liquids played in 9/11?
However, the size of containers is of little importance if 3 of you can take 5 x 100ml on board each
Has always seemed a way to get us to buy drinks at extortionate rates 'airside'. "
Thanks mate I'm glad you see my point....the others above have completely missed this scenario talking about security and checking in.
If liquids are a security issue then were are not secure anytime we fly based on above.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
9/11 changed the world aviation security wise, the terrorists may not have had bottles of bloody shampoo with them, but, it's been well proven that small amounts of liquid can be mixed to make a bomb, if you don't want to lose your liquids, put them in the hold or don't fly, simple really. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you remember 9/11 then why bother trying to bring any liquids on to a flight?
*Baffled
......apart from the finest Irish whiskey in a hip flask, that is!
Not sure what part liquids played in 9/11?
However, the size of containers is of little importance if 3 of you can take 5 x 100ml on board each
Has always seemed a way to get us to buy drinks at extortionate rates 'airside'.
Thanks mate I'm glad you see my point....the others above have completely missed this scenario talking about security and checking in.
If liquids are a security issue then were are not secure anytime we fly based on above.
"
Especially if you're able to bring liquids onboard from outside of the terminal! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's just the blind policing of 100ml that is annoying. If liquids are dangerous, then stop all of them going through. If you allow 100mls through, why not in a slightly larger bottle?
There doesn't seem to be any consistency. Plus, a lot of Euro airports don't police it at all. So the danger is not really eliminated. Security has to be consistent or it is useless.
Why have a fence that covers 75% of your property?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The liquids ban was nothing to do with 9/11, it was brought in after a failed plot a few years later.
I think the logic with being able to buy liquids after security is that those items have been security checked so that they can't have been tampered with, I'm sure I remember another plot where they'd got jobs in WHSmith airside to try and smuggle in water bottles containing explosives or something.
(But I agree, it's annoying about the container size thing, I doubt that's the real reason as much as it's about just trying to make the rule simpler and easier to get the message through to people) It's been this was for at least 10 years now though, so how come you even tried? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The liquids ban was nothing to do with 9/11, it was brought in after a failed plot a few years later.
I think the logic with being able to buy liquids after security is that those items have been security checked so that they can't have been tampered with, I'm sure I remember another plot where they'd got jobs in WHSmith airside to try and smuggle in water bottles containing explosives or something.
(But I agree, it's annoying about the container size thing, I doubt that's the real reason as much as it's about just trying to make the rule simpler and easier to get the message through to people) It's been this was for at least 10 years now though, so how come you even tried?"
On 9/11 there was a terrorist attack, that was my point.
But you're right, how comes a decade later poeple still haven't got it?
It's simple, just pack it in your main 'hold' luggage or don't bring it, - it's no wonder that the queues are so long at airside security!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's to stop certain minded people mixing a liquid explosive and bringing down a plane.
Normal, everyday liquids pose no threat but in most cases you can't tell what may be in a container. It could be water or it could be hydrogen peroxide (yes I know the smell is an obvious give away but there's another risk involved with sniffing every liquid you come into contact with).
These regulations have been around for several years now and are common knowledge. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The 100ml (and no more than 10) in a clear sealable bag thing is so that they can monitor an easily defined amount.
Yes it is kind of arbitrary but they had to draw a line somewhere and this is the one we've got.
Along with (now) having to ensure all electronic items are charged so they can be tested and the removal of belts and some shoes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
I try not to travel with hold luggage
I try not to take liquids with me
If I do, I make sure they're below 100 ml
I buy toiletries I need either airside or in my destination.. as small a size as possible
I leave unused toiletries behind when I come home
I know the rules on this
I stick to these rules
I've never had anything confiscated.
Boots, or other similar retailers, do a huge range of travel sized toiletries. Most big brands, including hair products and perfumes, also do travel size packs.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The liquids ban was nothing to do with 9/11, it was brought in after a failed plot a few years later.
I think the logic with being able to buy liquids after security is that those items have been security checked so that they can't have been tampered with, I'm sure I remember another plot where they'd got jobs in WHSmith airside to try and smuggle in water bottles containing explosives or something.
(But I agree, it's annoying about the container size thing, I doubt that's the real reason as much as it's about just trying to make the rule simpler and easier to get the message through to people) It's been this was for at least 10 years now though, so how come you even tried?
On 9/11 there was a terrorist attack, that was my point.
But you're right, how comes a decade later poeple still haven't got it?
It's simple, just pack it in your main 'hold' luggage or don't bring it, - it's no wonder that the queues are so long at airside security!
"
I understand the check in process or leave it approach- but your too busy spouting the rule book to stop and consider if it adds any security....It can't have been spelt out any better above. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The liquids ban was nothing to do with 9/11, it was brought in after a failed plot a few years later.
I think the logic with being able to buy liquids after security is that those items have been security checked so that they can't have been tampered with, I'm sure I remember another plot where they'd got jobs in WHSmith airside to try and smuggle in water bottles containing explosives or something.
(But I agree, it's annoying about the container size thing, I doubt that's the real reason as much as it's about just trying to make the rule simpler and easier to get the message through to people) It's been this was for at least 10 years now though, so how come you even tried?
On 9/11 there was a terrorist attack, that was my point.
But you're right, how comes a decade later poeple still haven't got it?
It's simple, just pack it in your main 'hold' luggage or don't bring it, - it's no wonder that the queues are so long at airside security!
I understand the check in process or leave it approach- but your too busy spouting the rule book to stop and consider if it adds any security....It can't have been spelt out any better above."
But here's the thing if they apply the rule ridgedly no one can complain of special treatment etc and more importantly some minimum wage security can't be duped by a good story.
For every 100,000 genuine cases if just one trick gets through its still a lot of lives |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"its bad enough queuing and tempers are short without a gob shite arguing about a bit of nothing and hoding things up they realy piss me of these sorts you know the rules get a life "
Thank you for your thoughts, have a nice day! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Airport security aren't the people to have this debate with, they only enforce the rules. Though personally I can't see tge point of getting in to a pointless argument with someone who can stop me getting on my flight |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
"
I've been behind similar at Newcastle many a time Quite infuriating. Actually, I hate airports, people are idiots. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
I've been behind similar at Newcastle many a time Quite infuriating. Actually, I hate airports, people are idiots. "
What's the point in making them drink it surely if you're going to blow yourself up in a little while you can just box a shot land of water, painkillers and anti acids drink some and smile and go throw up in the bogs later? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
I've been behind similar at Newcastle many a time Quite infuriating. Actually, I hate airports, people are idiots.
What's the point in making them drink it surely if you're going to blow yourself up in a little while you can just box a shot land of water, painkillers and anti acids drink some and smile and go throw up in the bogs later?"
I'm all for questioning the reasoning behind things, but not at 6am when I'm trying to catch a flight and have been queueing for ages and they've been told repeatedly that's what's going to happen |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Although I once did have my bag pulled aside. How was I to know that sausages 'scan as explosives' on some scanners?
So put your ground meat products in a separate tray folks...top tip  "
Mine is always getting searched, I must have a suspicious looking face. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
I've been behind similar at Newcastle many a time Quite infuriating. Actually, I hate airports, people are idiots.
What's the point in making them drink it surely if you're going to blow yourself up in a little while you can just box a shot land of water, painkillers and anti acids drink some and smile and go throw up in the bogs later?"
Well the bottles were opened and smelt, but the mother had to drink from each bottle. The father didn't like it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I adhere to the rules, no matter how ill conceived.
As to security queues...its the donuts who stand there listening to constant messages about what to do, but don't remove items before reaching the front of the queue that take the time.
I am ready way before then, but invariably stuck behind some plonker who hasn't bothered.
"Oh, do I have to take my belt off? Oh, yes I have a laptop...that comes out as well? Next thing you will be wanting to check these 6 bottles of baby feed I have in the pram? What, you need me to drink some of each? I don't like it"
(actually happened at Stansted)
I've been behind similar at Newcastle many a time Quite infuriating. Actually, I hate airports, people are idiots. "
I love airports, they bring out the best and worst in people. It's hilarious watching people totally loose it and also quite lovely to see people reunited. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"9/11 changed the world aviation security wise, the terrorists may not have had bottles of bloody shampoo with them, but, it's been well proven that small amounts of liquid can be mixed to make a bomb, if you don't want to lose your liquids, put them in the hold or don't fly, simple really."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eerobCouple
over a year ago
solihull |
The op will be complaining that drink drive limits should be relaxed (after all what difference will another bottle of wine make) and of course you should be able to walk around with your mk47 under your arm freely. Its not rocket science or difficult to follow such simple guidelines. Think the member of staff who said simply move along would have had a cheer from me, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I love airports, they bring out the best and worst in people. It's hilarious watching people totally loose it and also quite lovely to see people reunited."
They bring out the worst in me for sure, I become incredibly intolerant of everyone and everything, even those family reunions (if they're in my way  ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall "
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall "
"Why are you patting me down?"
"It's for your own safety sir"
"Do you think I've got a bomb on me I don't know about?"
*get shot*
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming."
You're not the only person stating it's not 100% 'safe'. But other people acknowledge the fact it's worth putting up with as it's better than no rules at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming."
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The liquids ban was nothing to do with 9/11, it was brought in after a failed plot a few years later.
I think the logic with being able to buy liquids after security is that those items have been security checked so that they can't have been tampered with, I'm sure I remember another plot where they'd got jobs in WHSmith airside to try and smuggle in water bottles containing explosives or something.
(But I agree, it's annoying about the container size thing, I doubt that's the real reason as much as it's about just trying to make the rule simpler and easier to get the message through to people) It's been this was for at least 10 years now though, so how come you even tried?
On 9/11 there was a terrorist attack, that was my point.
But you're right, how comes a decade later poeple still haven't got it?
It's simple, just pack it in your main 'hold' luggage or don't bring it, - it's no wonder that the queues are so long at airside security!
I understand the check in process or leave it approach- but your too busy spouting the rule book to stop and consider if it adds any security....It can't have been spelt out any better above."
Rulebook? It can be written on a small piece of paper or absorbed in a fraction of a brain cell, as can the security benefits! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
"
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^"
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming."
Geez, I'm beginning to regret not banging hard enough!!
......but I may hang around for long enough to hear the jingle-jangle of the penny dropping.
*makes large pot of Darjeeling! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating."
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"its bad enough queuing and tempers are short without a gob shite arguing about a bit of nothing and hoding things up they realy piss me of these sorts you know the rules get a life
Thank you for your thoughts, have a nice day!"
Valid point though.
For every time someone like you starts arguing it adds time further down the queue - you're the idiot tapping his brakes in the outside lane of the M1 for no reason and causing the tailback 2 miles further down...
Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Sorry OP, you're better off reading 'A Brave New World' if you want a serious explanation of it all. We fly so rarely the rules are different every time we go.
Last time, when I had to remove my belt, I wished you could buy underpants with the word "BANG!" on them, just to raise a smile when my trousers fell down.
No doubt next time we fly they'll be asking us to rub our belly and pat our head.
And if I can't take my own drink, drinks should be free 'airside' and on the plane.
Mr ddc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
"
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I got a half empty hair product container taken of me cause at 150mls it exceeded the rules.
even though I knew a reasonable debate would not be welcome with them, I asked when it's half empty (which could be verified) why still deny it?
Answer given : was people could smuggle lots of 100mls liquids past them and arrange to organize to meet an have a lot of this liquid in a bigger container.
I had 2 futile responses to this:
1- so was she telling me your job is redundant and your not making the plane anymore secure given less than 100mls of bad liquid in a fancy aftershave bottle will go unspotted???!
2- despite taking my 150ml container away can every single person walking through not just hit a duty free/costa/wh smith once through an buy a container - say a bottle of water (free with a newspaper woooo) and the risk still exists with many bad people adding there 100mls together???
The answer to both....move along sir. (fearing is only made my chances of flying worse I did just that!)"
The rules are quite explicit. They say: no half empty large containers in your hand luggage.
So you have choices.
A) Put your large containers in your checked luggage.
B) Take smaller containers in your hand luggage.
C) Don't fly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in..."
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks."
"Homophobic " ? Did you leave your sense of humour in bed when you got up this morning? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks."
I think this was just a joke, no need to be quite so touchy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I love airports, they bring out the best and worst in people. It's hilarious watching people totally loose it and also quite lovely to see people reunited.
They bring out the worst in me for sure, I become incredibly intolerant of everyone and everything, even those family reunions (if they're in my way )"
I'm the same, I've actually been known to tell people off at security. Those people who put all their items back on as soon as their tray comes out instead of just picking it up and moving to a better place. Drives me insane! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk."
Which again is pointless. He can't take the plane pilots can decompress it if they chose and other passengers are likely to rush the shot out of him before he can finish the air marshel assuming he doesn't incapacitate himself of course.
Peroxide would be an interesting one to try an get on board it's hardly a subtle chemical.
Even if he did get the air marsheels gun (q's using there is one on baord) 14 bullets isn't going to bring a plane down and as soon as it goes click he's going to be beaten to death. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I love airports, they bring out the best and worst in people. It's hilarious watching people totally loose it and also quite lovely to see people reunited.
They bring out the worst in me for sure, I become incredibly intolerant of everyone and everything, even those family reunions (if they're in my way )
I'm the same, I've actually been known to tell people off at security. Those people who put all their items back on as soon as their tray comes out instead of just picking it up and moving to a better place. Drives me insane!"
Ha ha - I've actually seen a group of girls in just bra & knickers wandering through duty free carrying there clothes in their arms!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks."
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I hope you also argued with the flight attendant when she * told you to put your seat belt on. Health and safety gone mad I tells ya
* For Wasp Hunter - Flight attendants may also be male or from an unspecified gender |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I hope you also argued with the flight attendant when she * told you to put your seat belt on. Health and safety gone mad I tells ya
* For Wasp Hunter - Flight attendants may also be male or from an unspecified gender"
I am more irate by people completely missing the point of the thread than I was with the women at security, our conversation was polite as being a dick wouldn't have helped anyone.
I'm not fighting the rules, I'm highlighting they don't keep us safe considering 2 people can sneak 5 x 100mls through security easily, empty them into a larger container bought in duty free.
But that's ok, less character assinate or talk about my metro hair products instead...or better yet, wait till done nut does something terrible and we call all come on here and question the inadequate rules then...I give up! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No ones "missed the point" actually.
The "5x" rule is to stop sufficient quantities getting through.
Even "if" several met up later they would still need a container big enough to mix it all in -
Notice that airside they don't exist? You can't buy large bottles of anything once you go through.
And let's be honest - the moment you mentioned "hair products" and "gel" - as a guy you were opening yourself up to it on here |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No ones "missed the point" actually.
The "5x" rule is to stop sufficient quantities getting through.
Even "if" several met up later they would still need a container big enough to mix it all in -
Notice that airside they don't exist? You can't buy large bottles of anything once you go through.
And let's be honest - the moment you mentioned "hair products" and "gel" - as a guy you were opening yourself up to it on here "
You never bought 1ltr bottle of buxton water before mate, or a litre of duty free???
Impossible is what it is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Personally, I think there should be a ban on bringing any liquid airside in hand luggage (apart from medication), -
Apart from infants, does anyone really need to carry any? And it would make flying a little safer, too!
That then should end any of the evident confusion & delays............... though I have my doubts! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I survive happily on hand luggage and decant small amounts of toiletries into the containers I bought specifically. I don't see why I should be punished although I of course would buy the basics when away if necessary.
. More concerning are the connecting flights through UK airports from places with less stringent controls...some of them never police liquids. Now, if you can ensure that all airports did this, then it would be more valid a measure.
A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's all very easy , if you don't like the rules no matter how strange they seem, then don't fly. Even my kids are aware they can't take bottled water through security!
Would make the daily operation of the airport run a lot smoother for all if people complied with the simple instructions....... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's all very easy , if you don't like the rules no matter how strange they seem, then don't fly. Even my kids are aware they can't take bottled water through security!
Would make the daily operation of the airport run a lot smoother for all if people complied with the simple instructions....... "
Yet another missing the point...good morning |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I survive happily on hand luggage and decant small amounts of toiletries into the containers I bought specifically. I don't see why I should be punished although I of course would buy the basics when away if necessary.
. More concerning are the connecting flights through UK airports from places with less stringent controls...some of them never police liquids. Now, if you can ensure that all airports did this, then it would be more valid a measure.
A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link"
if that's the case then they should have to have their hand luggage checked before entering the departure lounge; I'm really surprised that this doesn't happen in the Uk, - I've flown from the UK many times via Dubai & have had my hand luggage checked every time before entering the departure lounge at Dubai ........... & yet again before boarding my onward flight! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's all very easy , if you don't like the rules no matter how strange they seem, then don't fly. Even my kids are aware they can't take bottled water through security!
Would make the daily operation of the airport run a lot smoother for all if people complied with the simple instructions.......
Yet another missing the point...good morning "
Errrr no I don't think so.
i can't answer why you can buy 100ml plus airside which differs from the any of the above ^^ therefore may I suggest you email BAA for a detaild explanation or maybe the home office.
The point I'm making is ~ it's the rules. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk.
Which again is pointless. He can't take the plane pilots can decompress it if they chose and other passengers are likely to rush the shot out of him before he can finish the air marshel assuming he doesn't incapacitate himself of course.
Peroxide would be an interesting one to try an get on board it's hardly a subtle chemical.
Even if he did get the air marsheels gun (q's using there is one on baord) 14 bullets isn't going to bring a plane down and as soon as it goes click he's going to be beaten to death."
14 bullets doesn't have to bring the plane down, 14 bullets only need to kill 14 people (or maybe even 1 person) and the terrorists have succeeded and proven their point.
I'm merely suggesting scenarios that would be considered when designing and implementing security restrictions at airports. They may be far fetched but terrorism is asymmetrical so security services have to think 'outside the box' or we'd be seeing a lot more explosive shoes and underpants... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's all very easy , if you don't like the rules no matter how strange they seem, then don't fly. Even my kids are aware they can't take bottled water through security!
Would make the daily operation of the airport run a lot smoother for all if people complied with the simple instructions.......
Yet another missing the point...good morning "
So am I. Who would want to fly with hair product?
But seriously, how is an attendant supposed to know how much liquid is ina half empty openened bottle, or what it is? Just follow the rules and stop holding people up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
Forum Mod |
I know the rules in airport security and understand why we have them
I follow them because I want to get through without delay and without being stuck behind people who ignore them
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ENGUYMan
over a year ago
Hull |
I have worked in the Security industry in the past, especially within transport sectors since 9/11 and other terrorist related events.
Though I have left now, I still keep in touch with ex-colleagues. It is still mind boggling to hear that numerous passengers at airports still turn up and are completely unaware about what they can and can't take on board with them.
That's despite a lot of holiday brochures giving advice; most tickets issued will have accompanying documentation stating the rules. But still, these ignoramuses never read anything and wonder why they get stopped and have to hand items in.
I used to work in Port Security. Unlike airports, our search percentages were based on the Government's Security alert rating. That usually meant searching as a minimum, every 3rd passenger, car, coach and truck leaving the country. Normally, the majority of people were fine and cooperative, but there was always one who didn't. The eejit who's answered our questions with, "a guy outside asked me to carry a bomb on board!". He would be passed on to Special Branch to see if he could be as sarcastic with them.
People tried to smuggle out all types of items, eg, guns and ammunition and reptiles including poisonous snakes, but all in total ignorance of the laws not just in the UK, but in the destination countries.
All security personnel are trained to UK regs, usually under DoT requirements. Port security personnel are trained to International Maritime Security standards as well as DoT standards. In both sectors though, the DoT plus airline & port operators carry out constant inspections via "mystery passengers". If any security personnel slip up on what they should be doing, they can lose their job at worst.
So, to anyone who whinges about being delayed at Security etc, it's for a reason. Yes, some foreign countries don't do things as we know them in the UK, but in general, the UK has some of the highest security standards going.
For any traveller, that's reassuring! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"9/11 changed the world aviation security wise, the terrorists may not have had bottles of bloody shampoo with them, but, it's been well proven that small amounts of liquid can be mixed to make a bomb, if you don't want to lose your liquids, put them in the hold or don't fly, simple really."
You can make explosives out of solids to. And gases. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks."
Why not embrace that a man is open about his use of grooming products rather than look for something which patently isn't there..?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"9/11 changed the world aviation security wise, the terrorists may not have had bottles of bloody shampoo with them, but, it's been well proven that small amounts of liquid can be mixed to make a bomb, if you don't want to lose your liquids, put them in the hold or don't fly, simple really.
You can make explosives out of solids to. And gases. "
But at least the liquids angle is covered, yeah.
One less thing for security to worry about, one less angle for a planned future terror attack & the slightly safer & happier me & 'most' passengers on a plane!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle? "
... and all meet up in the toilets and start decanting into larger Evian bottle, making your 'bomb'.
It's a stupid rule that ensues, as the OP flagged up, and he's right... it doesn't keep us all safe!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Flying back from America they found a bottle of benadryl in my bag, one official showed it to his collegue who said "that's ok it's just benadryl"....lucky it didn't say liquid explosive i guess. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle? "
The Op is the one taking the piss with no concern for others stuck in a queue while he's having a chat. And I wonder how he could 'verify' the amount in his bottle and what it was |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Personally, I think there should be a ban on bringing any liquid airside in hand luggage (apart from medication), -
Apart from infants, does anyone really need to carry any? And it would make flying a little safer, too!
That then should end any of the evident confusion & delays............... though I have my doubts! "
That would be a complete pain in the ass.
One of my partners travels several times a month for work. Often for just two or three days at a time. He arrives at the client office straight from the airport in the morning, he often eats with them at lunchtime and then late, and then heads straight to his hotel. In the morning he's up and back to the client site...
Why should he have to spend money and time (because he has to find a place that sell the stuff) in a country he doesn't know just because some people can't work out what they can take through security?
On top of that, what about someone like me? I have allergies to some products that bring me out in rashes all over my body. I also have to use extremely gentle products because I have some eczema on my face. Should I just not be able to travel to anywhere that doesn't sell products with the ingredients written in English? And should I be forced to make sure I leave on a flight that gets in before lunchtime so that I can spend the first afternoon of my holiday/work trip trying to find products that don't make me want to tear my skin off? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Personally, I think there should be a ban on bringing any liquid airside in hand luggage (apart from medication), -
Apart from infants, does anyone really need to carry any? And it would make flying a little safer, too!
That then should end any of the evident confusion & delays............... though I have my doubts!
That would be a complete pain in the ass.
One of my partners travels several times a month for work. Often for just two or three days at a time. He arrives at the client office straight from the airport in the morning, he often eats with them at lunchtime and then late, and then heads straight to his hotel. In the morning he's up and back to the client site...
Why should he have to spend money and time (because he has to find a place that sell the stuff) in a country he doesn't know just because some people can't work out what they can take through security?
On top of that, what about someone like me? I have allergies to some products that bring me out in rashes all over my body. I also have to use extremely gentle products because I have some eczema on my face. Should I just not be able to travel to anywhere that doesn't sell products with the ingredients written in English? And should I be forced to make sure I leave on a flight that gets in before lunchtime so that I can spend the first afternoon of my holiday/work trip trying to find products that don't make me want to tear my skin off?"
Should have added - we both often travel with just hand luggage. Makes it easier and faster to get through the airport. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Airport security aren't the people to have this debate with, they only enforce the rules. Though personally I can't see tge point of getting in to a pointless argument with someone who can stop me getting on my flight"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle?
... and all meet up in the toilets and start decanting into larger Evian bottle, making your 'bomb'.
It's a stupid rule that ensues, as the OP flagged up, and he's right... it doesn't keep us all safe!
"
But if you follow it we all get through check in quicker! And should you/he be the ones to make the rules? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any."
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied."
Unless you live in Yorkshire. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied."
And please don't put yourself on a soapbox to "defend" gay, bi or just camp men. We don't need it. We can scratch eyes out for ourselves. Your not doing us any favours. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"This applies to airport workers as well, many times some of us have had our food taken from us as it is over the 100mls. "
seen a guy in a window seat pouring a 100ml of peroxide on his egg drop soup.
.
.
.
.
.
.
it didnt blow up. just ended up with egg on his face |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied."
Just so its "clear" and so you can take the rod out if your arse - "Jessie" has sod all to do with being homosexual. It is however a term for wimp/soft lad/big girls blouse.
That's how it was used so considering you're the only one with an issue over it perhaps you should look again at how I used the phrase.
Don't see the OP with his * **knickers in a twist.....
*this is in no way discriminatory to those whose choice is to wear clothing belonging to any gender other than themselves
** see Top Pics for evidence
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle?
... and all meet up in the toilets and start decanting into larger Evian bottle, making your 'bomb'.
It's a stupid rule that ensues, as the OP flagged up, and he's right... it doesn't keep us all safe!
But if you follow it we all get through check in quicker! And should you/he be the ones to make the rules?"
Who said I didn't follow it??
I've never taken ANY fluids through, since they introduced this 'security measure'.
Re read what OP said, he wasn't arguing about Following procedure. He was making the point that it fails to keep us all safe!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied.
Just so its "clear" and so you can take the rod out if your arse - "Jessie" has sod all to do with being homosexual. It is however a term for wimp/soft lad/big girls blouse.
That's how it was used so considering you're the only one with an issue over it perhaps you should look again at how I used the phrase.
Don't see the OP with his * **knickers in a twist.....
*this is in no way discriminatory to those whose choice is to wear clothing belonging to any gender other than themselves
** see Top Pics for evidence
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied.
Just so its "clear" and so you can take the rod out if your arse - "Jessie" has sod all to do with being homosexual. It is however a term for wimp/soft lad/big girls blouse.
That's how it was used so considering you're the only one with an issue over it perhaps you should look again at how I used the phrase.
Don't see the OP with his * **knickers in a twist.....
*this is in no way discriminatory to those whose choice is to wear clothing belonging to any gender other than themselves
** see Top Pics for evidence
"
you know whats homophobic? that nobody says diddley when there's a Mccarthyesq which hunt for a rascist when there isn't one there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied.
And please don't put yourself on a soapbox to "defend" gay, bi or just camp men. We don't need it. We can scratch eyes out for ourselves. Your not doing us any favours."
Defending myself, as a genderqueer individual. Who has been mistaken for a man and called a 'fucking jessie' before because I didn't stand up to their ideas of what men are, and because I was being intimate with a man. It's not nice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied.
And please don't put yourself on a soapbox to "defend" gay, bi or just camp men. We don't need it. We can scratch eyes out for ourselves. Your not doing us any favours.
Defending myself, as a genderqueer individual. Who has been mistaken for a man and called a 'fucking jessie' before because I didn't stand up to their ideas of what men are, and because I was being intimate with a man. It's not nice."
The "Jessie" remark wasn't aimed at you. Stop fighting other peoples battles when they haven't asked for you to do so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I didn't think Jessie was homophobic I thought it was a reference to somebody being soft/cowardly/mard/big baby granted it might be used in conjunction with something homophobic but not homophobic in itself
Airport security and security in general may well be jobsworths at times but then again they are often damned if they do damned if they don't, as for being excessive and overboard with searching and checks trust me if you worked in the industry saw all the tricks and heard the stories you'd soon suspect everything especially when it's you in the firing line when it goes wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle?
... and all meet up in the toilets and start decanting into larger Evian bottle, making your 'bomb'.
It's a stupid rule that ensues, as the OP flagged up, and he's right... it doesn't keep us all safe!
But if you follow it we all get through check in quicker! And should you/he be the ones to make the rules?
Who said I didn't follow it??
I've never taken ANY fluids through, since they introduced this 'security measure'.
Re read what OP said, he wasn't arguing about Following procedure. He was making the point that it fails to keep us all safe!
"
I have read what the Op said and he is the one missing the point and so are you. He was not stopped for the size of the bottle as such but because of 'that' liquid inside the bottle which could have been combined with others. How is the security guy to know what it is? Do you? No it doesn't keep us safe but maybe a little safer eh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"im sure your all taking the piss. not one of you is stupid enough not to understand the op's point. you cant take 75ml of opened but you can take 10x 100ml and buy a bigger bottle?
... and all meet up in the toilets and start decanting into larger Evian bottle, making your 'bomb'.
It's a stupid rule that ensues, as the OP flagged up, and he's right... it doesn't keep us all safe!
But if you follow it we all get through check in quicker! And should you/he be the ones to make the rules?
Who said I didn't follow it??
I've never taken ANY fluids through, since they introduced this 'security measure'.
Re read what OP said, he wasn't arguing about Following procedure. He was making the point that it fails to keep us all safe!
I have read what the Op said and he is the one missing the point and so are you. He was not stopped for the size of the bottle as such but because of 'that' liquid inside the bottle which could have been combined with others. How is the security guy to know what it is? Do you? No it doesn't keep us safe but maybe a little safer eh"
Lol. I'm not even talking about THAT person!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
 Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly."
In one bottle?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
"
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said "
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said "
cringe  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said "
You can have an open bottle of liquid - providing the bottle itself is no larger than 100ml |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said "
You can bring open bottles of liquid through with hand luggage. I've been using the same containers for years. I top them up from the big bottles of product I have at home before travelling. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids"
HE might have been talking about the OP.
But, I wasn't.
My comment was to another 'OP', and specific to his comment (and only his) about how various people could all take through a number of 100ml bottles (all full) meet up airside, buy a larger bottle of Evian... or Buxton and start decanting in the toilets trying to make a 'bomb'.
I wish I'd never commented in the first place
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said
You can have an open bottle of liquid - providing the bottle itself is no larger than 100ml"
How many of those can you have? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said
You can have an open bottle of liquid - providing the bottle itself is no larger than 100ml
How many of those can you have?"
quiet day? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said
You can have an open bottle of liquid - providing the bottle itself is no larger than 100ml
How many of those can you have?"
Total volume of liquid no more than 1000ml in containers not exceeding 100ml in size - which must fit comfortably inside a clear plastic bag (of approx size 20cm x 20cm) - which must be sealed (zip or slide lock - not tied at the top) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"re re read the op. he was. your allowed a litre of liquids. it was simply because of the size of the bottle.
Who's allowed a litre of liquids
just people who fly.
In one bottle?
no, in 100ml bottles. but the op had 75ml. so it must of been the size of the bottle like I said
No, for goodness sake. It was the fact that it was OPEN and how would anybody then know what the liquid actually was? Like I said
You can have an open bottle of liquid - providing the bottle itself is no larger than 100ml
How many of those can you have?
quiet day?"
sunbathing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"One day at Stansead:
Mid 50s white ginger male: "Do I look like a terrorist?"
Security Officer: "Well you do look a bit like Martin McGuinness, now, may I search your bag?"
o I remember him from surrendering in '97. this anecdote encompasses the op. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No ones "missed the point" actually.
The "5x" rule is to stop sufficient quantities getting through.
Even "if" several met up later they would still need a container big enough to mix it all in -
Notice that airside they don't exist? You can't buy large bottles of anything once you go through.
And let's be honest - the moment you mentioned "hair products" and "gel" - as a guy you were opening yourself up to it on here
You never bought 1ltr bottle of buxton water before mate, or a litre of duty free???
Impossible is what it is. "
Van you take that stuff on board in hand luggage?
I'd have thought a 1 liter glass bottle would have been more of a weapon than any fluids |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Personally, I think there should be a ban on bringing any liquid airside in hand luggage (apart from medication), -
Apart from infants, does anyone really need to carry any? And it would make flying a little safer, too!
That then should end any of the evident confusion & delays............... though I have my doubts!
That would be a complete pain in the ass.
One of my partners travels several times a month for work. Often for just two or three days at a time. He arrives at the client office straight from the airport in the morning, he often eats with them at lunchtime and then late, and then heads straight to his hotel. In the morning he's up and back to the client site...
Why should he have to spend money and time (because he has to find a place that sell the stuff) in a country he doesn't know just because some people can't work out what they can take through security?
On top of that, what about someone like me? I have allergies to some products that bring me out in rashes all over my body. I also have to use extremely gentle products because I have some eczema on my face. Should I just not be able to travel to anywhere that doesn't sell products with the ingredients written in English? And should I be forced to make sure I leave on a flight that gets in before lunchtime so that I can spend the first afternoon of my holiday/work trip trying to find products that don't make me want to tear my skin off?
Should have added - we both often travel with just hand luggage. Makes it easier and faster to get through the airport."
And I have an allergy to being 30,000ft in the sky during a terrorist attack ........... what a pain! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No ones "missed the point" actually.
The "5x" rule is to stop sufficient quantities getting through.
Even "if" several met up later they would still need a container big enough to mix it all in -
Notice that airside they don't exist? You can't buy large bottles of anything once you go through.
And let's be honest - the moment you mentioned "hair products" and "gel" - as a guy you were opening yourself up to it on here
You never bought 1ltr bottle of buxton water before mate, or a litre of duty free???
Impossible is what it is.
Van you take that stuff on board in hand luggage?
I'd have thought a 1 liter glass bottle would have been more of a weapon than any fluids"
You clearly don't understand what liquid explosive can do within a pressurized aircraft compartment at 30,000ft. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk.
Which again is pointless. He can't take the plane pilots can decompress it if they chose and other passengers are likely to rush the shot out of him before he can finish the air marshel assuming he doesn't incapacitate himself of course.
Peroxide would be an interesting one to try an get on board it's hardly a subtle chemical.
Even if he did get the air marsheels gun (q's using there is one on baord) 14 bullets isn't going to bring a plane down and as soon as it goes click he's going to be beaten to death.
14 bullets doesn't have to bring the plane down, 14 bullets only need to kill 14 people (or maybe even 1 person) and the terrorists have succeeded and proven their point.
I'm merely suggesting scenarios that would be considered when designing and implementing security restrictions at airports. They may be far fetched but terrorism is asymmetrical so security services have to think 'outside the box' or we'd be seeing a lot more explosive shoes and underpants..."
But they haven't really proven their point you want to kill 14 random people go take a car and drive through the local pedestrian zone on a Saturday afternoon you'll get way more than 14 for a lot less risk.
If you're going for a plane it's either to bring it down or to use it as a weapon. Airport security isn't all that fussed about a few dead passengers all they're there for is the plane.
Plus it's really hard to recruit someone on the "right your gonna get his gun kill a few then you're going to be beaten, captured, tortured and stuck it git mo for the rest of you unbearable lifea"
Comers red to some glorious fireball exit of a strike against the enemy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now get a proper haircut instead of looking like a metrosexual Jessie and there'll be no need to take hair products whatever size container it's in...
And for future reference - could you not be so homophobic please mate? Thanks.
What was homophobic there?
Metrosexual : nope that's straight people.
Jessie, nope that's wimps/cowards.
Stop looking for homophobia where there isn't any.
A Jessie is also a slang word for someone who is homosexual and perceived to be a wimp because he prefers to have sex with men.
Language is really powerful. This kind of nasty, stereotyped language that implies 'real men' are straight, don't put product in their hair, and don't like nice haircuts, is damaging to many men. There's no proper way to be a man, contrary to what you implied."
Thought you lived in the north Jessie has never meant guy up here.
Or are you thinking maybe of American TV programs never heard anyone gay called Jessie.
You can be gay and a Jessie or straight and a Jessie it had nothing to do with who you stick your cock in its if your a massive wimp or not.
.also gain he even said metrosexual which is typically straight
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No ones "missed the point" actually.
The "5x" rule is to stop sufficient quantities getting through.
Even "if" several met up later they would still need a container big enough to mix it all in -
Notice that airside they don't exist? You can't buy large bottles of anything once you go through.
And let's be honest - the moment you mentioned "hair products" and "gel" - as a guy you were opening yourself up to it on here
You never bought 1ltr bottle of buxton water before mate, or a litre of duty free???
Impossible is what it is.
Van you take that stuff on board in hand luggage?
I'd have thought a 1 liter glass bottle would have been more of a weapon than any fluids
You clearly don't understand what liquid explosive can do within a pressurized aircraft compartment at 30,000ft."
I do but what I mean is given the most deadly attack in terrorist history wasn't carried out with guns or explosives but small sharp pointy things I'm more surprised you can take glass bottles on board than anything |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
..." But they haven't really proven their point you want to kill 14 random people go take a car and drive through the local pedestrian zone on a Saturday afternoon you'll get way more than 14 for a lot less risk. If you're going for a plane it's either to bring it down or to use it as a weapon. Airport security isn't all that fussed about a few dead passengers all they're there for is the planes.
But that isn't really the whole story, is.
14 people die on a plane & that airline & many others may well be grounded or airports closed etc... - has a huge commercial blow to whichever country
Another example is - it's not just the murdering of a few dozen tourists on a Tunisian beach, it's the 15% of GDP that tourism brings Tunisia & is in serious jeopardy which empowers IS. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"..." But they haven't really proven their point you want to kill 14 random people go take a car and drive through the local pedestrian zone on a Saturday afternoon you'll get way more than 14 for a lot less risk. If you're going for a plane it's either to bring it down or to use it as a weapon. Airport security isn't all that fussed about a few dead passengers all they're there for is the planes.
But that isn't really the whole story, is.
14 people die on a plane & that airline & many others may well be grounded or airports closed etc... - has a huge commercial blow to whichever country
Another example is - it's not just the murdering of a few dozen tourists on a Tunisian beach, it's the 15% of GDP that tourism brings Tunisia & is in serious jeopardy which empowers IS."
...and in doing so, destabilises the country, making it easier for IS to infiltrate.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
"but I'm not a terrorist, the rules shouldn't apply to me""
"Ah, I see sir, you're one of those freedom fighters... so sorry to have inconvenienced you... on your way now, sir. Oh, don't forget this nitro, or your AK47, sir. Safe journey, sir, enjoy the flight. Have a nice day." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk.
Which again is pointless. He can't take the plane pilots can decompress it if they chose and other passengers are likely to rush the shot out of him before he can finish the air marshel assuming he doesn't incapacitate himself of course.
Peroxide would be an interesting one to try an get on board it's hardly a subtle chemical.
Even if he did get the air marsheels gun (q's using there is one on baord) 14 bullets isn't going to bring a plane down and as soon as it goes click he's going to be beaten to death.
14 bullets doesn't have to bring the plane down, 14 bullets only need to kill 14 people (or maybe even 1 person) and the terrorists have succeeded and proven their point.
I'm merely suggesting scenarios that would be considered when designing and implementing security restrictions at airports. They may be far fetched but terrorism is asymmetrical so security services have to think 'outside the box' or we'd be seeing a lot more explosive shoes and underpants...
But they haven't really proven their point you want to kill 14 random people go take a car and drive through the local pedestrian zone on a Saturday afternoon you'll get way more than 14 for a lot less risk.
If you're going for a plane it's either to bring it down or to use it as a weapon. Airport security isn't all that fussed about a few dead passengers all they're there for is the plane.
Plus it's really hard to recruit someone on the "right your gonna get his gun kill a few then you're going to be beaten, captured, tortured and stuck it git mo for the rest of you unbearable lifea"
Comers red to some glorious fireball exit of a strike against the enemy"
Yes, they could take a car and kill people, a lot of people and it would be very easy. But, it possibly wouldn't be major international news and it wouldn't strike as much fear in people because it's so such an easy task to complete. The reason they target planes is because it's so hard, it's proves they have the ability to get past any security we put in place. Remember terrorism isn't just the act of carrying out an atrocity - it's the fear it instills in your target population and the negative impact it can also have upon various industries, tourism for example. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
slight change of persepective.
Very few (relatively) people fly daily so these security checks on the whole inconvenience most people 2 or maybe 3 times a year.
Overall this is far less intrusive then it was in the 70's & 80's when it was commonplace to have your bag searched entering many public buildings (in the UK).
I'm not trying to play down terrorism but when was the last time you saw a building with a board outside giving the security state?
ie things like "Bikini Black Alpha"
Personally I feel less at risk now than I did back then
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Even after a decade, some people just don't get it!!
*bangs head on wall
It's you who doesn't get it....maybe you've banged your head too often....I was refused 75mls at the airport an only wanted clarification why.
With the answer I realized I'm not safe at all under current liquid rules- but yes lets not question things and blindly March over the cliff because a queue may be forming.
75mls in a 150ml container. That leaves room for the addition of another 75mls of liquid to create an explosive which could kill multiple people or bring down the plane.
To be fair it's fairly unlikely you're limited to pretty much non nitrogen based explosives for getting past security and those range from too shit to do much damage to often too unstable for you to fully mix them and so only a small initial amount will go off and ruin the rest of the reaction properly just covering you in gunk.
Btw following this post you're all probably on some watch lists sorry ^_^
There's plenty of stuff you can carry to make an explosive liquid that could kill or maim several people and how about liquids that can incapacitate? Tear gas is very easy to make and on a plane it could be devastating.
Yes but again most explosives of a suitable power are nitrogen based which are useless for concealment we've had chemical sniffers for them for a. Very long time.
And tear gas on a plane would be pointless the air vents out of well vents in the rear of the plane with the pacs supplying free air towards the front the pilot simply would have to increase the pacs output and the gas would be vented out of the rear very quickly and couldn't flow forward toward the cockpit anyway.
And even if you did fill a plane with gear glass aside from being annoying it's not gonna seriously harm anyone.
Even a small amount of year gas could subdue an air marshall long enough for a terrorist to gain control of the cabin. The ventilation system wouldn't be able to vent all the gas that quickly. Also, try mixing hydrogen peroxide and alcohol together and see how that chemical reaction goes...
It's just a possible scenario.
Other chemical, biological,flammable liquids could be mixed and possibly cause catastrophic loss of life. It's all about limiting risk.
Which again is pointless. He can't take the plane pilots can decompress it if they chose and other passengers are likely to rush the shot out of him before he can finish the air marshel assuming he doesn't incapacitate himself of course.
Peroxide would be an interesting one to try an get on board it's hardly a subtle chemical.
Even if he did get the air marsheels gun (q's using there is one on baord) 14 bullets isn't going to bring a plane down and as soon as it goes click he's going to be beaten to death.
14 bullets doesn't have to bring the plane down, 14 bullets only need to kill 14 people (or maybe even 1 person) and the terrorists have succeeded and proven their point.
I'm merely suggesting scenarios that would be considered when designing and implementing security restrictions at airports. They may be far fetched but terrorism is asymmetrical so security services have to think 'outside the box' or we'd be seeing a lot more explosive shoes and underpants...
But they haven't really proven their point you want to kill 14 random people go take a car and drive through the local pedestrian zone on a Saturday afternoon you'll get way more than 14 for a lot less risk.
If you're going for a plane it's either to bring it down or to use it as a weapon. Airport security isn't all that fussed about a few dead passengers all they're there for is the plane.
Plus it's really hard to recruit someone on the "right your gonna get his gun kill a few then you're going to be beaten, captured, tortured and stuck it git mo for the rest of you unbearable lifea"
Comers red to some glorious fireball exit of a strike against the enemy
Yes, they could take a car and kill people, a lot of people and it would be very easy. But, it possibly wouldn't be major international news and it wouldn't strike as much fear in people because it's so such an easy task to complete. The reason they target planes is because it's so hard, it's proves they have the ability to get past any security we put in place. Remember terrorism isn't just the act of carrying out an atrocity - it's the fear it instills in your target population and the negative impact it can also have upon various industries, tourism for example."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *onghMan
over a year ago
cardiff |
Flying from Bristol a couple of years ago, we'd just got through security when one of our party went to get something from his hand luggage only to discover an almost full pint of milk. He'd intended to leave it with my cat sitter at whose house we'd all met at and set out from. I'm not sure if milk or milk bottle plastic have some magical properties which make them invisible to the x-ray scanners. We reported it and I do wonder what happened to the lady who was supposed to be looking the screen. It was semi-skimmed, just in case you were wondering. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We need profiling - the Isrealis do it and no Israeli aircraft has ever been hijacked, blown up as far as I know. And they've got very good at it since the hijackings in the 70s.
Sure it will offend some people, but white Caucasian, blue rinsed middle aged grannies are not typically suicide bombers.
We are more at risk than ever and the current measures are just sticking plaster. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"We need profiling - the Isrealis do it and no Israeli aircraft has ever been hijacked, blown up as far as I know. And they've got very good at it since the hijackings in the 70s.
Sure it will offend some people, but white Caucasian, blue rinsed middle aged grannies are not typically suicide bombers.
We are more at risk than ever and the current measures are just sticking plaster. "
al aqsa martyrs brigade, red brigade, blue rinse brigade. need I say any more? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We need profiling - the Isrealis do it and no Israeli aircraft has ever been hijacked, blown up as far as I know. And they've got very good at it since the hijackings in the 70s.
Sure it will offend some people, but white Caucasian, blue rinsed middle aged grannies are not typically suicide bombers.
We are more at risk than ever and the current measures are just sticking plaster. "
They don't just use profiling though and their own security screening is far more intrusive (and takes longer) than the screening we have now.
Those grannies would be prime targets for that nice man they buy their greengrocery off "Oh your going to Florida, can you take this birthday present for my dear little grand-daughter" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
