No more "hand carried" wine in flights

[Jenise]

Understood, but you're only on the B team. I'll take it.

In a case like this, I will happily agree to be relegated to the B team.

Smart boy. Do be assured, I don't regard you as the B Team in any other way, this was envy!

Update from the Government of Canada.

"OTTAWA - August 10, 2006 - The additional security measures regarding the restriction on liquids in carry-on luggage, put in place by CATSA this morning, have now been extended to all flights departing from Canadian airports."

Earlier in the day, this restriction just applied to UK-bound flights.

[Jenise]

Bruce, thanks for looking that up. I wouldn't have had anything on me but a bottle of water, but it's nice to know I needn't bother. Sure hope the stews can still store Duty Free goods, though, we were hoping to grab some single malts for destination libation.

I can not understand how the purchase of duty free bottles, or any carry on goods in glass bottles, has been allowed at all post 9/11 (or 12/9 as it was here). A smashed bottle in a terrorists hand is a MUCH more powerful weapon that a mere box cutter ever was.

You answered your own question, Bob. That's pretty much exactly where I was coming from, although I have a somewhat darker and even more paranoid notion that it's not only for "show and reassurance" but also to help build a climate of opinion in which citizens are willing to accept increasing police-state restriction in the name of "security" and, perhaps, stay so emotionally involved with security and the alleged war on terrorism than worry about what the incumbent administration is doing in Iraq and at home.

You remember all the 'inspiring' speeches about how "the terrrrists will not destroy our way of life" from our elected leaders? They were right. Our own governments will do it for them.

Göring had it right all those years ago at Nuremberg. "But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Graeme

The item that worries me is not wine or juice, but water for the eyes. I'm going to speak to the airlines about this and try to get them to furnish a sterilized water during the flight (and good luck to me). Flying 16 hours or more with no proper sterilized water to use in the eyes is not funny and is a medical issue for some of us that needs to be addressed.

I'll continue to follow this and see what the scoop is as we have a couple of weeks yet.

I don't know the situation in France. Here in the USA, it sounds like the TSA (transportation security administration) agents have to make judgement calls on medical necessity. If it is a medical issue for you, I would suggest a small amount of sterile water, a signed letter from your doctor on stationary stating your name and that it is a medical necessity for you, and a willingness to taste and/or allow the security agent to test the liquid to prove it is just water.

I hope all goes well for you.

Fascinating and scary quote there, Graham.

The Canadian news now suggest that ALL flights, including domestic flights, are included.

I can hardly contain my rage on this one. The existing 'security' measures were mostly a joke, put in place to placate the public. The greatest danger to me is still the internal workers in the airports. I understand that better checks are now done, but still, the system is totally privatized, and little monitoring is done. And paying them minimum wage doesn't exactly fill me with trust.

Now they are saying no liquids at all, including touthpaste! Give me a 'fing break!

The USA has imposed a ban on all domestic and international flights on all items containing liquids and gels, with the exception of some perscription drugs, injectable insulin, etc.

Bottom line is, check in everything.

-Paul W.

And, of course, that's what I did to save my toothpaste and deodorant. And here I sit, in the Sheridan, Oklahoma City, sans suitcase. Everybody checked luggage today. The result was that the airlines were unable to get all the checked luggage on the flights with the passengers, and it may show up eventually, probably after I no longer have need for the files I packed in my suitcase for the deposition tomorrow.

The result was that the airlines were unable to get all the checked luggage on the flights with the passengers, and it may show up eventually, probably after I no longer have need for the files I packed in my suitcase for the deposition tomorrow.

I can see a lot of other lawyers making many dollars from people sueing the airlines for baggage that goes missing.

Now they are saying no liquids at all, including touthpaste! Give me a 'fing break!

FWIW - In the aftermath of 9-11 I had a plastic "spork" (combination spoon and fork) confiscated from my backpacking gear. I found the visual image of someone attempting to take over an airplane with a spork quite funny - "Remain in your seats, or I will inflict moderate epidermal indentations!"

[Robin Garr]

I can see a lot of other lawyers making many dollars from people sueing the airlines for baggage that goes missing.

Not likely, Neil. A considerable body of international law and treaty pretty much ensures that the airlines' exposure for baggage loss is strictly limited. You'd be hard pressed to find a lawyer who'd tell you different, I'm afraid.

[Jenise]

John S said:

Now they are saying no liquids at all, including touthpaste! Give me a 'fing break!

Right, although one reporter I saw on the air, reporting by phone after clearing security at JFK and giving up all his carry-on liquids including his liquid foundation for on-camera work, noted that he was able to repurchase liquids from the vendors on the other side of the security gate. 24 hours later, the geniuses at Homeland Security apparently hadn't figured out how to turn off the last-minute supply. Whether that was a mere overlook or the right to make a buck trumping the right of anyone else to be safe (so American, this) was unclear. He bought a cannister of nose spray just to see if he'd get away with it.

Now they are saying no liquids at all, including touthpaste! Give me a 'fing break!

FWIW - In the aftermath of 9-11 I had a plastic "spork" (combination spoon and fork) confiscated from my backpacking gear. I found the visual image of someone attempting to take over an airplane with a spork quite funny - "Remain in your seats, or I will inflict moderate epidermal indentations!"

Sam
Thanks for making me laugh!
regards
Ian

I thought most airlines provided water in little tubs anyway. They will just have to carry more stocks that they know are OK.

A smashed bottle in a terrorists hand is a MUCH more powerful weapon that a mere box cutter ever was.

I don't agree. The 9/11 terrorists used their knives to cut crew/passengers as a bargaining measure to get allowed onto the flight deck.

I don't think that now they'd be let onto the flight deck however many necks they cut, and I don't think passengers would be anymore inclined to sit still while they did it.

Better to issue all passengers with a large serrated steak knife with their meal so they'd be armed in a similar situation.

However, where we now seem to be is the terrorists understand that the previous tactic will no longer work, that they will not be allowed to fly the plane to destruction, and so their intention to blow up the plane mid air.

I thought most airlines provided water in little tubs anyway. They will just have to carry more stocks that they know are OK.

BA are doing so, stopping carrying on board duty frees in order to carry more bottled water.

Given everything else that is going on, and the potential for what could have happened, I realize this is a very (very) minor issue, but I guess this brings a halt to the practice of transporting your vacation wine purchases home in carry on baggage, rather than trusting your treasures to the gentle treatment of bagge handlers.

I guess the good news in all of this is that the restrictions regarding shipping of wine to other states has been lifted or lessened in most cases.

So I guess one might just plan ahead a bit and UPS some wine to your destination and enjoy it upon arrival.

I flew out of SFO early Thursday morning, and back in on Friday evening.

Obviously, got caught up in the hubbub. Chucked my toothpaste and deodorant (it was a gel rather than a solid). Had to give up my Flonase, even though it was prescription medication, because it did not have my name on it. At first they were going to deny me taking on my injection pen of Byetta, because the pen did not have my name on it either. When I said I'd be happy to inject myself right in front of everyone as an offer of good faith, the supervisor let me take it on board.

Much of this is ridiculous, certainly. Hysterical over-reaction. And what, pray tell, does it matter, when you can put the very same items in your check-through luggage---which still to this day is not inspected. My understanding was that the liquids in question were to be combined, then detonated with an electical signal...as in from a cellphone. Which signal would just as easily go to the luggage hold as within the cabin. SO, again, what's being achieved with the ban on cabin liquids?

I vacillate, of course, in that area between blase acceptance and the elusive and unreachable "perfect" security (I used to work security on weapons systems, and I know there is no such thing as security.) But what it comes down to, for me, is that obvious precautions should be taken, but no matter what is done, flying nowadays is dangerous. Also, unavoidable. So we should, you'll pardon the expression, learn to live with unavoidable dangers.

Oh, and yes, I did see several bottles of quite expensive wine dumped into the trash hampers outside security in the San Francisco airport.

[Robin Garr]

no matter what is done, flying nowadays is dangerous. Also, unavoidable.

No, actually it's not. I'm surprised you said that, Hoke, and wonder if you were really thinking about it when you did. Even in the worst imaginable scenario, flying is safe. There is a very tiny chance that some idiots might still try something on any given flight, but as Shoe Bomber Richard Reid found out, one thing that HAS changed since 9/11/01 is that passengers and cabin crew won't be docile the next time.

[James Roscoe]

Just to add to what Robin said, Im pretty sure it's a lot safer to get on a plane than to drive your car to get groceries. Yet we get in the car all the time without thinking. Flying in an airplane is one of the statistacly, safer activities in which we engage. I wonder why so many people are frightened by it.

People are afraid of flying because of the lack of control. If you're driving the car you can convince yourself that everything will be fine because of course YOU aren't goin to wreck the car...you can convince yourself to not think about all the other drivers out there.

For what it's worth, I flew yesterday from Spokane to Baltimore (connecting in Minneapolis) with six bottles of wine from Walla Walla. In the past, I'd always lugged them on board with me but with that option gone, I bought a shipping box from a winery with styrofoam slots for six bottles and checked it through. It seemed well-protected and insulated. and everything came out fine -- no breaks, no spills, no sign of too much heat (despite the 96 degree temperature in Spokane). Even if they change the rules to allow bottles on board, I'd probably go this route again. Easier on the back and shoulders, especially when you have to change planes that are half-a-mile away.

[James Roscoe]

People are afraid of flying because of the lack of control. If you're driving the car you can convince yourself that everything will be fine because of course YOU aren't goin to wreck the car...you can convince yourself to not think about all the other drivers out there.

Jeremy, you are spot on. I guess having been a lawyer and done enough car-wreck cases, I know what real control you have when you drive. Most people don't take the other people on the road into consideration when they drive. People make mistakes at a fairly predictable rate. Thus auto accidents are predictable and often pretty gruesome.

I was flying from LA to Korea a week ago. I bought a bottle of water at the airport bookstore and went to the x-ray screening to get to my gate. The security took my sealed bottle of water. I told the guy he could open it and I would drink it. It was sealed and they sold the same water in the magazine shop in the gate area after the check!
I told him I needed my (unsealed) bottle of saline solution and he said that was fine. How weird is that?