Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The mom could have, and should have, put that thing in the checked luggage.
I agree that this situation looks ridiculous, but the airport security doesn't have the time to make a case-by-case assessment. That's why they have a protocol that takes away discretion. They have to follow best practices. We don't want any particularly stupid officer to make a determination on something so important.
Look, before 9/11, everyone would have said, "You've got to be kidding me", if airport security said they have to take small pocket knives (e.g., the Swiss Army knife) and passengers have to take off their belts and shoes before going through the metal detector. If there was FB back then (thankfully no), there would have been mass outrage over how stupid these rules are. Oh? Hindsight is 20/20.
The mom could have, and should have, put that thing in the checked luggage.
I agree that this situation looks ridiculous, but the airport security doesn't have the time to make a case-by-case assessment. That's why they have a protocol that takes away discretion. They have to follow best practices. We don't want any particularly stupid officer to make a determination on something so important.
Look, before 9/11, everyone would have said, "You've got to be kidding me", if airport security said they have to take small pocket knives (e.g., the Swiss Army knife) and passengers have to take off their belts and shoes before going through the metal detector. If there was FB back then (thankfully no), there would have been mass outrage over how stupid these rules are. Oh? Hindsight is 20/20.
Mick
Have you seen the "gun"? If you haven't, you might want to take a look at it. If someone seriously thought it was a gun, then they need some help.
Just another fine example of "zero tolerance" gone crazy.
If the "gun" actually LOOKED somewhat like a real gun, I could understand.
But, come on, people, that thing looks EXACTLY like what it really IS, a silly TOY!
Spin it anyway you want, confiscating the thing is inexcusable!
Have you seen the "gun"? If you haven't, you might want to take a look at it. If someone seriously thought it was a gun, then they need some help.
Did you not read what I wrote - if the rules said no object with a trigger mechanism, do you think they should make exceptions for that kid (but what if the rules said absolutely no exceptions). Without knowing what the security manual says exactly, how can we make a judgment? Do you want individual security officer to deviate from the protocol because something is seemingly obvious to him? What if he uses a terrible judgment in other situations; wouldn't he be putting hundreds of lives in danger? Furthermore, do we want that officer to take a risk of getting fired or disciplined because he wants to please an enraged American mom over a $5 toy?
Did you not read what I wrote - if the rules said no object with a trigger mechanism, do you think they should make exceptions for that kid (but what if the rules said absolutely no exceptions). Without knowing what the security manual says exactly, how can we make a judgment? Do you want individual security officer to deviate from the protocol because something is seemingly obvious to him? What if he uses a terrible judgment in other situations; wouldn't he be putting hundreds of lives in danger? Furthermore, do we want that officer to take a risk of getting fired or disciplined because he wants to please an enraged American mom over a $5 toy?
Mick
There are exceptions to every rule. Common sense should also apply.
The mom could have, and should have, put that thing in the checked luggage.
I agree that this situation looks ridiculous, but the airport security doesn't have the time to make a case-by-case assessment. That's why they have a protocol that takes away discretion. They have to follow best practices. We don't want any particularly stupid officer to make a determination on something so important.
Look, before 9/11, everyone would have said, "You've got to be kidding me", if airport security said they have to take small pocket knives (e.g., the Swiss Army knife) and passengers have to take off their belts and shoes before going through the metal detector. If there was FB back then (thankfully no), there would have been mass outrage over how stupid these rules are. Oh? Hindsight is 20/20.
Mick
Yeah, but no one will ever be able to hijack a plane with a box cutter or small knife again. Not in this country, anyway. Airline passengers have killed people for less.
9-11 happened because the prevailing wisdom of the time was to cooperate with hijackers and hostage takers. Not anymore.
Yeah, but no one will ever be able to hijack a plane with a box cutter or small knife again. Not in this country, anyway. Airline passengers have killed people for less.
9-11 happened because the prevailing wisdom of the time was to cooperate with hijackers and hostage takers. Not anymore.
While I agree with your statements, good luck convincing the TSA to change that rule. Ever.
I duly note your views on how the Irish airport security rules ought to be. I think they have a suggestion box at the Dublin airport.
Mick
Nope. Just airport rules in general. You brought up the US airports by referencing 911 so its all fair game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
