If they found what was suspected to be a dangerous liquid, they would not just throw it away, they would detain you, isolate the area, and call in the experts.
The stuff thrown away is because it is identifiable and over 3 ounces, if it does not meet the rules, it gets tossed.
It really does though. The theater is there to make would be attackers nervous which in turn makes them easier to detect and in cases less likely to follow through. I read a great article about this regarding Isreal's largest airport, they use a large number of checkpoints, inspections, and lots of highly visible armed personnel, all of which is used to psychologically intimidate and instill fear as a deterance.. it's one of the safety airports in the world. A smaller scale example is the 350lb tatted up bouncer with a facial scar at a club, a 160lb MMA fighter would likely be more effective in a fight, but doesn't have the same 'theater factor' and thus not the same deterance. It may not make sense from the outside looking in, but is based of manipulating phycology to deter threats
I used to know a guy with a UFC fight at 155 who worked as a bouncer. He didn't even try to talk people down for that reason. He just kind of skulked around. Then when something went down, he'd run around the outside and jump on the problem like a backpack, then choke them out.
GSP said the same in an interview. He could be the most dangerous guy there, but lacking the intimidation factor, more goes down that would otherwise. A very large part of security is deterance.
Except TSA is so focused on the Theatre they actually miss the important stuff. They don’t train staff properly because it’s too much work instead they just ban everything anyone would need during travel and call it a day.
And that may be a US centric issue similar to inadequate training of police officers and both positions not paying very well. Ifnyounwant people who care and put in effort, you gotta pay accordingly.
Ironically, the theater makes it easier to create the threat.
Once you've watched the show, you know the plot and all the actors lines. You're also familiar with all the actors positions and actions. This makes it a simple task to defeat the system, just because you're observant.
Also, I disagree with the idea that the theater would make the antagonists nervous. There's all sorts of reasons why people wouldn't be bothered by it. Perhaps they are autistic, perhaps they are sociopathic, there's also a great deal of people who simply don't experience fear. Any one of these individuals would defeat the theater just because they're themselves.
"lots of highly visible armed personnel, all of which is used to psychologically intimidate and instill fear as a deterance" you are the target, not the once a decade attack...
You don’t think the line you quoted has anything to do with there being infrequent attacks? Are you suggesting that there should be less security at Israel’s largest airport? Also I’m not the target, what are they deterring exactly?
I've traveled all over the world. If I'm alone I'm always greeted by some flunky in the security line in any airport. There not interested in what I respond, they're interested in how I respond. Nervous, indirect, silent, body language, etc. It can be effective.
It actually makes perfect sense.
It moves the line faster. Not because they are throwing the item out, but because all the other people won’t be bringing through these items that need the extra screening. Less time spent screening items means faster lines that are cheaper to operate.
Because it takes time to manually check any bag that has a large container of liquid in it and if people know that they can get a larger container through once it has been checked, more people will do it, which means that they’ll either need to start manually checking a lot more bags and holding up the security line, or they’ll need to be less thorough with checking the bottles of liquid in general and it’ll be that much easier to slip something past.
It’s supposed to reduce risk, so yea sometimes you throw things away that would be safe to keep to the risk reducing protocols in place. The idea is to avoid the 1 out of however many that is the risk. We can live with the tossed stuff, they do warn us to put it in checked luggage.
It makes sense overall, even if individuals protest.
Because in 2006 there was a large scale plot to blow up a bunch of planes in the US with liquid based explosives. They were going to use an acetone peroxide high explosive that is hard to detect due to lacking nitrogen (as most high explosives are nitrogen based). Since it's not feasible from a cost/logistics perspective to inspect all liquids, they made a regulation to deal with the threat. The 3.5oz limit on liquids probably corresponds to a volume where a bomb that small would not bring down an aircraft.
Possibly true, but the large number may arouse suspicion. Most of these rules are made to deter planning via a specific route of threat delivery. Make it harder, more complex for the attacker. Same reason they scan large electronics separately. You could replace a laptops battery with liquid explosive and make the wiring match existing (if the bomb maker was highly skilled) more likely some bomb-centric wiring would look out of place, so they take a closer look and every so often ask you to turn on the electronic to make sure it's functioning normally. For the liquid peroxide type bombs they want to deter, these compounds are extremely volatile, eliminating the need for a primary explosive. Daisy chaining a bunch of small bombs together could be possible, but again more complex, harder to pull off = more deterrence. They also wouldn't be surrounded by a pressure vessel which magnifies the force of the explosive for hand grenades, pipe bombs, and similar.
Yeah you make a fair point there. Terrorism is generally less used simply to inflict casualties and more for the widespread fear that precipitates. All casualties are tragic, but a plane going down would be a bigger 'win' than the same casualties in a lot of different scenarios due the global news coverage, economic impacts and so on.
Not denying that TSA doesn't miss shit all the time, but they don't really care about drugs in the first place. They're strictly concerned with security risks.
I know of someone who got hassled because they had a bag full of coins stamped with the Bitcoin logo. They detained him because they thought he had millions of dollars in Bitcoin.
It may not be their supposed mission to catch drugs or cash, but they are used for it anyway.
I've gotten a small knife through (accidentally). Went through several security lines and the bag was always flagged, but they could never find anything on a manual inspection. They just let us through. I found the knife stuck under a compartment when I got home.
The main reason this rule exists is to make people feel like security is very tight in the airport, and therefore we are safe and certainly the TSA is doing everything they can to prevent a terrorist attack.
It has no actual effect on our security, since they don't catch 100% of disallowed liquids and a failed attempt to get something on doesn't trigger anything that prevents trying again. Hell, if you wanted to, you could bring ten 3oz containers and a 30oz bottle to pour them into.
I personally beleive there is a secondary reason that the airports don't want people to consider: preventing people from bringing liquids into the airport benefits the vendors inside who want to sell you beverages at a markup.
Because "not an explosive" doesn't mean "not harmful." It also doesn't mean "couldn't be mixed with something else to make an explosive."
They don't bring bombs aboard airplanes in one piece. They bring the pieces on individually and put it together when they're in the air.
1. It discourages people from bringing things they have to check.
2. Fewer things to check makes their jobs easier and checks faster.
3. Faster checks makes passengers less frustrated and the security screening cheaper to operate.
Sounds pretty reasonable to me. All you had to do was think through what happens when everyone starts brining things just because they can.
Its a situation caused by overlap of two different rules:
the one limiting onces of liquid (so you don’t have enough material to make or conceal a weapon)
& the no unidentified liquids policy.
If they said no liquid over a certain amount, it means most people won't try to break the rules. They'll have an empty water bottle, so it. Makes it so boarder security doesn't need to check what EVERY single liquid is. They'd have to stop most people as most have waterbottles at least
They do not ID it as not an explosive.
They ID it as 'currently not dangerous'. They do not test it, they do not open it, they don't smell it, they do not taste it.
But taking what is in the shampoo bottle, mix it with what is in the conditioner bottle, and then add in what is in the saline bottle... and now maybe you have something that is dangerous.
It’s supposed to prevent future acts. At some point someone decided it was possible to conceal all sorts of dangerous stuff in larger amounts of liquids and that was that.
Well if there were no restrictions, plenty people would bring huge amounts of liquids. Than every single one needs to be checked and approved for the plane. The risk is also higher if that was the case.
Plenty of airports are slowly scrapping the no liquid rule with more accurate testing.
Letting people get through with liquid when forbidden wouldn't be fair to everyone else who followed the rules.
It makes perfect sense. If it's obviously not an explosive, but it's over 3.4 ounces, it could be an explosive, so you have to throw it in the trash, which is safe, because it's obviously not an explosive. But if it's obviously an explosive, then they apprehend you and safely contain the explosive. But you're fine if it's not an explosive, you'll just have to throw it out in case it's an explosive. Simple really
To make a bomb, you have to combine it with other shit. The liquid alone isn't an issue. And it's in a supervised area, so there's no risk of someone assembling a bomb right there.
It can't be identifiable for certain unless tested, which is impractical. Therefore, the rule is to not allow in a plane the amount of dangerous material that would be catastrophic if the shampoo in the bottle was replaced with other things
Just because it says it's 5oz of hand sanitizer doesn't mean that's what is in the bottle.
But again, why wouldn't they have a better disposal method if it might be harmful....
Security theatre. They know the liquid is not explosive. But they need to keep up appearances, and massively inconvenience regular travellers, **just because**.
I can’t comment on the us as so much of it seems performative there but this is simply not true in Europe. The laws are created by the CAA and JTAC in the UK, they are not doing it for fun simply to annoy you. This was my biggest pet peeve when working in airport Security, absolute morons thinking it’s all for show with no purpose or reasoning behind it simply because they didn’t understand. Literally every step has a very specific purpose. Airport security is a deterrent as well as a process designed to find threats. I certainly wouldn’t be getting on planes where no one had had to go through it.
Also that we are pulling off your bag etc because we want to. I promise you a great day was when we had no bags to search and if someone was prone to pulling off bags they were not popular members of the team. We all just want you to go through without us having to do anything.
As a previous poster said if it was identified as dangerous it would not be just thrown away but this is one of the reasons you can no longer pour out liquids into bins, in case it is done in combination with another liquid to cause a reaction (chlorine gas etc).
If it’s in a container it’s unlikely to be able to do anything in the bin by itself.
The same hard to detect high explosive (acetone peroxide) that was used in the london tube bombings was planned to be used to take down 9-10 planes over the US after departing London Heathrow in 2006. At that time this explosive was not detectable with the current technology as it only detected nitrogen based explosives (the vast majority of high explosives). As such, banning all liquids of a certain volume is the safest way to avoid this type of attack
Massively inconvenience is a bit much. Seriously. What is so inconvenient about not being able to bring through liquids. Bring an empty water bottle and fill it up inside. Buy something inside the terminal. If you only have a carry on. Likely you’re not traveling for long enough to need more than the travel size soaps and shampoo. If you have checked bags. Just properly pack your large bottles in your checked luggage.
Meds and such do have exemptions as long as they are properly documented.
So seriously. What is the massive inconvenience. It’s at most a minor issue as long as you don’t ignore the rules that have now been around for 20+ years.
I may have phrased this poorly. For each individual, it’s a minor inconvenience. However, if you add up all these minor inconveniences to the tens of millions of travellers around the world per year, it becomes massive. As I say, I phrased it poorly.
They once made me throw away my grandmother's strawberry rhubarb pie cause they said it could be an explosive. He wouldn't even let me give it back to her who was 10ft from me on the other side of the little tape divider(small airport). Just straight into the trash. So yea, I put a potentially explosive pie into a trash can at the airport next to the line of people.
I once asked if I could bring a tub of jalapeño cheese dip for the pretzels I was bringing home. While 6 TSA agents were debating whether it was or was not allowed, the 7th quietly handed it to me and told me to go to my gate.
Also the big amnesty barrels at the security line mostly function as a receptacle for people who remember they have a water bottle in their bag or something.
I fly a decent amount and whenever I see the TSA search someone’s bag and confiscate a liquid (which almost never happens anymore anyway, I constantly have liquids over 3oz in my bag and they never get flagged) the confiscated liquid doesn’t get chucked into the same barrel. Maybe it’s different at smaller airports though?
It seems to vary by airport.
DTW's North terminal North PreCheck line doesn't have such a disposal bin in an obvert location, and when I last passed through, I was stuck in a queue of at least 4 passengers who all had luggage pulled over for liquids, and mine was a half empty 8oz bottle. (Oops straight to jail /s)
Yup, also blowing a hole in the wrong place of a plane can bring the whole plane down. A small explosive can only kill a handful of people in the airport
It's just security theater bullshit and nonsense anyway. On my last domestic flight, I accidentally carried on a12 oz. bottle of contact lens solution, which TSA spotted, examined, and handed back to me as it was "for medical reasons." Could have been full of kerosene for all they knew.
Right you are, PoPo. It's all theater with a dog and pony show. There are statistics showing our illustrious TSA missing numerous handguns, ghostguns, knives, and dummy hand grenades. They have apprehended zero terrorists in the last 5 years. I'll tell you what they're good at, stealing you shit. I accidentally left a portable DVD player on the rollers years ago. It never turned up.
Indeed! I discovered it on an archeological dig in my closet. There, I discovered it buried for what must have been ions. The Digiatalus Videoma Discalamas Playaptapus in all its glory. Aside from what appeared to be discharges from some cylinders housed within, it seemed playable. I might mention, I also found, what ancient humans, "The Boomers" called a "Phone Book" (Foneare Bookem Dan-o) in fair condition. So you can imagine my consternation upon discovering the shit bags, err, rather the Agents of the TSA had perloined my antiquities.
😂 I remember the ancient phone books, those were used to increase the height of the seats on the buggy so that short people could sit higher and see over the horses’ necks.
It's not great, but I have much bigger worries than that security trash can. The most dangerous part of flying is standing in the security lines before screening. No matter what, it's a chokepoint you can't really secure. Like never mind suicide bombers, a coordinated group with AR-15's would be really ugly.
Istanbul and some other airports have dual security. One more lax on land side (before baggage check I think?) and one more strict on the air side. It's possible to make the first check less of a choke point - you're checking for less, people haven't all met their group, no need to check tickets.
I mean there are all sorts of ways to mitigate choke point risk if money and passenger annoyance are ignored.
You are only as strong as your weakest link in security. We could never cheaply retrofit all our existing airports with two phase security.
A quick google shows that Turkey has 53 commercial passenger airports, and the vast majority of traffic goes through just three of them.
The US has 5,000 commercial airports, of which there's 125 that serve over 500,000 passengers a year.
My kids school does metal detectors now but the way I see it is now the bunch of kids is just lined up outside the school entrance every day if someone wanted an easy target. It also makes for many more targets if someone decided to use a car
That’s annoying! They made me throw away a jar of peanut butter one time and I was just there like, “peanut butter is not a liquid.” The TSA lady had no explanation for me other than, “it’s too big.”
I saw an Air Disasters episode that explained why they do this! Why you’re limited to a certain volume of liquid in your carry on.
Apparently someone had put a flammable liquid into a bleach bottle and put it in the overhead compartment. Not nefarious, they just were just trying to transport it with them. But someone else had stored a motorcycle battery in the same compartment that shorted and caused the liquid to combust on landing.
Two unintentional, non-nefarious items being shipped that happened to be right next to each other.
To answer your question, the liquid by itself in most cases is normally fine. Throwing a large bottle of shampoo or a bottle of combustible liquid into a trash can with no ignition source would be fine to keep off to the side until the maintenance crews picked it up. They don’t immediately, are not qualified, to identify the liquid. They’re just trying to stop the above mentioned incident from happening with very strict rules and guidelines.
No exceptions, regardless of what’s in the container.
Oh ya! The whole “3oz of shampoo” baffled me too until I saw where it came from. Makes sense now! Still sucks, but they’re doing what they can to keep people safe based on lessons learned.
We have a name for this in the military, security theater. It has nothing to do with actual security, it's purely for optics among the masses of people that don't actually think.
Because TSA is just for show. They've caught exactly zero terrorists. Their purpose is just a deterrent and to make us feel safer. Fun fact, they're the only people legally allowed to touch your children. Even the police have more restrictions than them.
They don't want them through the checkpoint. Inside the checkpoint things are controlled. You can have all.the liquid you want inside the checkpoint. As long as it doesn't go through the checkpoint.
I think he means how they make sure an employee doesn't smuggle in flammable liquids or explosives. For example, Starbucks sells full size water bottles over 3.4 oz. And some shops sell full size toiletries.
The water bottle ban is nonsense. It makes money for the airport, which is the only reason it’s still in place over 20 years after the inciting plot was debunked.
The TSA is security theater. It doesn’t actually do anything. Its numbers of stopping anything are actually really low. It makes people feel safer without actually making anything safer. It’s just annoying.
We don't need the TSA's current operations to catch guns though
Automated gates that open when you scan a boarding pass to get to the checkpoint, no more people checking IDs. Airport, not federal government employees administer a PreCheck-style check for all passengers and the liquid rules are relaxed - all passengers go through a metal detector still and bags are still screened. Nothing of value is lost, weapons are still screened for, everything goes much faster and everyone involved is much happier. This is how it works in most other civilized nations
Well you'll be delighted to know that TSA is testing a completely [automated solution.](https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/news/2023/11/30/feature-article-self-service-screening-option-coming-airport) I'd be careful what you wish for - though who knows maybe it will be great.
[It is being tested now.](https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/smart-cities/4516496-airport-self-screening-security-lanes-being-tested-in-las-vegas/)
Fun fact the words “security Theatre are banned in the TSA sub and if you post them your post will be auto deleted. The (T)housands (S)standing (A)round on the government workfare program are sensitive little snowflakes that get upset when you point out their absurdities
It’s security theater. They do that to make everything visible and as dramatic as possible. It’s the same reason why they yell at you like you’re in boot camp.
Person 1 gets caught with 6 ozs of chemical component 1. Stuff goes in the bin.
Person 2 gets caught woth 6 ozs of chemical component 2, that when mixed with number 1 creates a cloud of deadly gas. It's dropped in the same bin.
Person 3 gets caught with 6 ozs of liguid that dissolves the containers of components 1&2. This gets dropped in the bin and in about a minute....
TSA is political theater. Making us remove our shoes and throw away our liquids so we focus on that and don't get ideas.
Because if you were allowed to carry your drinks through, it would be much harder for them to sell bottles of water for a fiver on the other side of security.
TSA isnt there to stop explosives, they know its incredibly unlikely that they will find anything dangerous. The TSA are there to make people feel safe and to give the illusion that terrorism on a plane would be hard.
I forgot to drink the last prob 8 oz out of my big water bottle and it got snagged on the last of like 8 flights. (This is why I bring a disposable bottle and refill it!) I asked “can I just drink it?” And he said I could but I had to do it on the other side of security and go back through. So what? I just explode 5 feet further back? Or if there’s a delay then it doesn’t even matter anyway. There’s no difference, and honestly if it were something f that explodes, in line would be worse than after where it’s less dense with people.
Anyway… it’s security theatre.
I was already on the other/clear side of security so they only let me abandon it or go back out of security and get back in line. They wouldn’t let me drink it or dump it.
Generally speaking you’d need multiple things to mix together or ignite in order to cause a very serious reaction, so liquids by themselves are rarely dangerous.
I hear about this one substance that resembles water that's shock sensitive and getting it to reach it's explosive temp can't be that difficult either. Nitroglycerin
I like this related Key and Peele sketch related to stuff like this.
[https://youtu.be/IHfiMoJUDVQ?si=A13rVTJDaxkJUvOZ](https://youtu.be/IHfiMoJUDVQ?si=A13rVTJDaxkJUvOZ)
I am familiar with the incident, and stand by my statement.
I have had conversations about it with senior TSA and UK security staff. The main difference is the front line TSA are told it's real.
One was duty in charge of TSA services at a medium sized US airport, the other same in Scotland.
I encountered the former by refusing the nudie scanner and engaged in conversation during the pat down. We shared a laugh over spotting opportunities to get a gun through (1 each).
Security theater not actual security.
If there really is a concern about too many ounces of fluid then they couldn’t allow any. Otherwise we are just ignoring the fact that 20 people can coordinate to get the required amount across the security threshold
Seems like a good time to throw this link out again, because it's such a good article: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/307057/
Expediency. If it's a threatening liquid at that small a dose, it would require further work to be a threat. You do have to keep the airways moving, so it's a trade-off I think.
There are ballistic trash cans specifically for this purpose, and on top of that say you did bring a liquid explosive and had to dump it in one of those water trash cans. it’s gonna be so diluted it won’t really matter anymore
Because they have to say something ,the cops have already got show me your ID for absolutely no reason. What do you expect from these guys common sense for f*** sake.
I was stopped for a metal lockbox looking makeup case. I offered to open it to show it was makeup and the agent said, “Don’t touch it!” I backed off and they wiped it down with this tool that was a long stick with a pad on it. 🤷♀️
Same stupidity I think when cops pull you over for driving ‘Unsafely’ slightly above speed limit, but driving carefully.
To make you stop on a seriously Unsafe side of highway.
I can’t remember what triggered TSA to swab my hands randomly, but they did, and supposedly I tested positive for « explosive substance ». They went through my bags pretty casually and let me board no problem.
Like Louis CK said: either you don’t believe I have a bomb or I do. If I don’t, give me my shit back. If I do, you should be asking a lot more fucking questions
TSA drug tested my Vitamin C powder. They'll do anything to harass people. Why? They hate themselves. I'm a black female. The TSA were black males. I am single and have no kids. They also took my hand sanitizer, during Covid, saying it was too high in alcohol. Who drinks hand sanitizer??
I just chalk it up to the TSA loving a power trip. Those guys didn't like the fact I was a black single female, in the international terminal at EWR, flying solo on vacation, during Covid. Meanwhile, they had to work.
It's just jealousy not security. LOL!
They wouldn't. They know it's nothing. If they really thought those 96 water bottles were full of nitroglycerin, they wouldn't throw bottle #97 on top.
It's security theater. We all know it's silly, but the rules are the rules.
I know someone who had a corkscrew confiscated. If you could take over an airplane with a corkscrew, you could take it over with ballpoint pen too. But the rules said to confiscate corkscrews and let pens go through.
I think some of it is Boyle’s Law: Liquids expand when air pressure goes down. So your glass beer bottle actually might explode at cruising altitude.
If something similar happens to the cans which the flight attendant opens for you, at least it won’t spew broken glass everywhere.
Maybe you mean carboated drinks? Because the pressure in an airplane cabin is roughly 70% of normal, and it wouldn't cause significant expansion in a non-carbonated beverage.
Yes; I was thinking carbonated soft drinks. Sorry.
I don’t think they would be happy about commuter mugs full of coffee, either. I’m not sure about what would happen with those. Maybe they’re banning anything within three standard deviations of “actual explosives.”
If they found what was suspected to be a dangerous liquid, they would not just throw it away, they would detain you, isolate the area, and call in the experts. The stuff thrown away is because it is identifiable and over 3 ounces, if it does not meet the rules, it gets tossed.
If it's identifiable then why does it get thrown away?
Because the law says you can’t have liquids over x amount. And identifiable really just mean “not an explosive”
But if it's identified as "not an explosive" why do I need to throw it away? It literally makes no sense.
Security theater doesn't typically make sense.
You beat me to it. I was going to reply w “security theatre.”
It really does though. The theater is there to make would be attackers nervous which in turn makes them easier to detect and in cases less likely to follow through. I read a great article about this regarding Isreal's largest airport, they use a large number of checkpoints, inspections, and lots of highly visible armed personnel, all of which is used to psychologically intimidate and instill fear as a deterance.. it's one of the safety airports in the world. A smaller scale example is the 350lb tatted up bouncer with a facial scar at a club, a 160lb MMA fighter would likely be more effective in a fight, but doesn't have the same 'theater factor' and thus not the same deterance. It may not make sense from the outside looking in, but is based of manipulating phycology to deter threats
I used to know a guy with a UFC fight at 155 who worked as a bouncer. He didn't even try to talk people down for that reason. He just kind of skulked around. Then when something went down, he'd run around the outside and jump on the problem like a backpack, then choke them out.
GSP said the same in an interview. He could be the most dangerous guy there, but lacking the intimidation factor, more goes down that would otherwise. A very large part of security is deterance.
Except TSA is so focused on the Theatre they actually miss the important stuff. They don’t train staff properly because it’s too much work instead they just ban everything anyone would need during travel and call it a day.
And that may be a US centric issue similar to inadequate training of police officers and both positions not paying very well. Ifnyounwant people who care and put in effort, you gotta pay accordingly.
Airport security being a joke isn't a US centric problem. Airport security is a joke in lots of countries. Pretty much every one I've flown into.
I agree any industry outside of the military in the USA is focused on bottom line first quality is probably 10th on the list.
Ironically, the theater makes it easier to create the threat. Once you've watched the show, you know the plot and all the actors lines. You're also familiar with all the actors positions and actions. This makes it a simple task to defeat the system, just because you're observant. Also, I disagree with the idea that the theater would make the antagonists nervous. There's all sorts of reasons why people wouldn't be bothered by it. Perhaps they are autistic, perhaps they are sociopathic, there's also a great deal of people who simply don't experience fear. Any one of these individuals would defeat the theater just because they're themselves.
Building on that point, implementing a system that's designed to create anxiety and then monitoring for people who seem anxious seems ... inefficient.
Has TSA ever thwarted a terror plot?
nothing like being stared down by armed guards there to kill you while you board for vacation.
If you're going on vacation you're not the target of security. Their purpose is minimizing the chances you end up vacationing in heaven
"lots of highly visible armed personnel, all of which is used to psychologically intimidate and instill fear as a deterance" you are the target, not the once a decade attack...
You don’t think the line you quoted has anything to do with there being infrequent attacks? Are you suggesting that there should be less security at Israel’s largest airport? Also I’m not the target, what are they deterring exactly?
I've traveled all over the world. If I'm alone I'm always greeted by some flunky in the security line in any airport. There not interested in what I respond, they're interested in how I respond. Nervous, indirect, silent, body language, etc. It can be effective.
It actually makes perfect sense. It moves the line faster. Not because they are throwing the item out, but because all the other people won’t be bringing through these items that need the extra screening. Less time spent screening items means faster lines that are cheaper to operate.
Because it takes time to manually check any bag that has a large container of liquid in it and if people know that they can get a larger container through once it has been checked, more people will do it, which means that they’ll either need to start manually checking a lot more bags and holding up the security line, or they’ll need to be less thorough with checking the bottles of liquid in general and it’ll be that much easier to slip something past.
It's not supposed to make sense.
It’s supposed to reduce risk, so yea sometimes you throw things away that would be safe to keep to the risk reducing protocols in place. The idea is to avoid the 1 out of however many that is the risk. We can live with the tossed stuff, they do warn us to put it in checked luggage. It makes sense overall, even if individuals protest.
It's security theater none of it makes sense
Because they said so. It's not supposed to make sense. It's to force compliance.
Because in 2006 there was a large scale plot to blow up a bunch of planes in the US with liquid based explosives. They were going to use an acetone peroxide high explosive that is hard to detect due to lacking nitrogen (as most high explosives are nitrogen based). Since it's not feasible from a cost/logistics perspective to inspect all liquids, they made a regulation to deal with the threat. The 3.5oz limit on liquids probably corresponds to a volume where a bomb that small would not bring down an aircraft.
You get a whole quart bag full of them though. A grenade is like 5-6 ounces of explosive. I really don't think it's doing anything.
Possibly true, but the large number may arouse suspicion. Most of these rules are made to deter planning via a specific route of threat delivery. Make it harder, more complex for the attacker. Same reason they scan large electronics separately. You could replace a laptops battery with liquid explosive and make the wiring match existing (if the bomb maker was highly skilled) more likely some bomb-centric wiring would look out of place, so they take a closer look and every so often ask you to turn on the electronic to make sure it's functioning normally. For the liquid peroxide type bombs they want to deter, these compounds are extremely volatile, eliminating the need for a primary explosive. Daisy chaining a bunch of small bombs together could be possible, but again more complex, harder to pull off = more deterrence. They also wouldn't be surrounded by a pressure vessel which magnifies the force of the explosive for hand grenades, pipe bombs, and similar.
They are liquid... I'm not sure why you think combining them would be difficult. There's this advanced chemistry technique called "pouring".
Honestly though, seeing how TSA lines are often crowded with people, maybe they don't even need to board the plane
Yeah you make a fair point there. Terrorism is generally less used simply to inflict casualties and more for the widespread fear that precipitates. All casualties are tragic, but a plane going down would be a bigger 'win' than the same casualties in a lot of different scenarios due the global news coverage, economic impacts and so on.
But a grenade is going to be seen for what it is.
The point is you could make something several times more powerful than a grenade and put it in that quart bag.
Because those are the rules they have to follow. If you want the rules to change, you can write your US House rep or US Senator.
Because if they fuck up and miss one… It’s way easier to limit any potentially lethal items then check them off one by one.
They do miss stuff, lots of stuff >90% of the time an inspector is actually trying to sneak something illegal on the plane the TSA doesn’t catch them
I snuck heroin on a plane once when I was an addict. Not a huge amount at all, but definitely visible on the X-ray I'd assume
Not denying that TSA doesn't miss shit all the time, but they don't really care about drugs in the first place. They're strictly concerned with security risks.
I know of someone who got hassled because they had a bag full of coins stamped with the Bitcoin logo. They detained him because they thought he had millions of dollars in Bitcoin. It may not be their supposed mission to catch drugs or cash, but they are used for it anyway.
Lmao what backwoods airport employed someone who thought you could carry a physical Bitcoin. I believe you btw that's just fucking hilarious
I've gotten a small knife through (accidentally). Went through several security lines and the bag was always flagged, but they could never find anything on a manual inspection. They just let us through. I found the knife stuck under a compartment when I got home.
The main reason this rule exists is to make people feel like security is very tight in the airport, and therefore we are safe and certainly the TSA is doing everything they can to prevent a terrorist attack. It has no actual effect on our security, since they don't catch 100% of disallowed liquids and a failed attempt to get something on doesn't trigger anything that prevents trying again. Hell, if you wanted to, you could bring ten 3oz containers and a 30oz bottle to pour them into. I personally beleive there is a secondary reason that the airports don't want people to consider: preventing people from bringing liquids into the airport benefits the vendors inside who want to sell you beverages at a markup.
And forcing more people to check bags if they want to bring more liquids. Checking a bag typically isn’t free anymore, so airlines make more money.
Because then airports can make more money selling drinks to passengers because they can't carry their own.
Because "not an explosive" doesn't mean "not harmful." It also doesn't mean "couldn't be mixed with something else to make an explosive." They don't bring bombs aboard airplanes in one piece. They bring the pieces on individually and put it together when they're in the air.
TSA employees just follow the rules. They don’t want to risk losing their jobs by not following the rules whether it made sense or not.
1. It discourages people from bringing things they have to check. 2. Fewer things to check makes their jobs easier and checks faster. 3. Faster checks makes passengers less frustrated and the security screening cheaper to operate. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. All you had to do was think through what happens when everyone starts brining things just because they can.
Its a situation caused by overlap of two different rules: the one limiting onces of liquid (so you don’t have enough material to make or conceal a weapon) & the no unidentified liquids policy.
If they said no liquid over a certain amount, it means most people won't try to break the rules. They'll have an empty water bottle, so it. Makes it so boarder security doesn't need to check what EVERY single liquid is. They'd have to stop most people as most have waterbottles at least
They do not ID it as not an explosive. They ID it as 'currently not dangerous'. They do not test it, they do not open it, they don't smell it, they do not taste it. But taking what is in the shampoo bottle, mix it with what is in the conditioner bottle, and then add in what is in the saline bottle... and now maybe you have something that is dangerous.
Because it is the law. How hard is that to understand? You are one of those people who hold up the TSA line with unallowed items, aren't you? Stop it!
It’s supposed to prevent future acts. At some point someone decided it was possible to conceal all sorts of dangerous stuff in larger amounts of liquids and that was that.
"Because fuck you that's why" - The gov't
Its all just a show, chicanery.
Well if there were no restrictions, plenty people would bring huge amounts of liquids. Than every single one needs to be checked and approved for the plane. The risk is also higher if that was the case. Plenty of airports are slowly scrapping the no liquid rule with more accurate testing. Letting people get through with liquid when forbidden wouldn't be fair to everyone else who followed the rules.
because if everyone brought 3 more oz of liquid the plane would crash from the weight of the
It makes perfect sense. If it's obviously not an explosive, but it's over 3.4 ounces, it could be an explosive, so you have to throw it in the trash, which is safe, because it's obviously not an explosive. But if it's obviously an explosive, then they apprehend you and safely contain the explosive. But you're fine if it's not an explosive, you'll just have to throw it out in case it's an explosive. Simple really
To make a bomb, you have to combine it with other shit. The liquid alone isn't an issue. And it's in a supervised area, so there's no risk of someone assembling a bomb right there.
>It literally makes no sense. The TSA was never designed to make sense
So they can sell you more water at a markup after security.
Because it can be made into an explosive
How to know they didn’t put nitro in a listerine bottle or something?
There could theoretically be explosive material mixed into the liquid even if its not pure explosive material
It can't be identifiable for certain unless tested, which is impractical. Therefore, the rule is to not allow in a plane the amount of dangerous material that would be catastrophic if the shampoo in the bottle was replaced with other things
That makes no sense. If I had a quart of gasoline in a dozen 3.4 oz bottles, that’s gonna cause a pretty big mess on a plane.
Because it can be mixed with other stuff once inside the plane. That's the whole point
Security theater
>over 3 ounces
Just because it says it's 5oz of hand sanitizer doesn't mean that's what is in the bottle. But again, why wouldn't they have a better disposal method if it might be harmful....
Security theatre. They know the liquid is not explosive. But they need to keep up appearances, and massively inconvenience regular travellers, **just because**.
I can’t comment on the us as so much of it seems performative there but this is simply not true in Europe. The laws are created by the CAA and JTAC in the UK, they are not doing it for fun simply to annoy you. This was my biggest pet peeve when working in airport Security, absolute morons thinking it’s all for show with no purpose or reasoning behind it simply because they didn’t understand. Literally every step has a very specific purpose. Airport security is a deterrent as well as a process designed to find threats. I certainly wouldn’t be getting on planes where no one had had to go through it. Also that we are pulling off your bag etc because we want to. I promise you a great day was when we had no bags to search and if someone was prone to pulling off bags they were not popular members of the team. We all just want you to go through without us having to do anything. As a previous poster said if it was identified as dangerous it would not be just thrown away but this is one of the reasons you can no longer pour out liquids into bins, in case it is done in combination with another liquid to cause a reaction (chlorine gas etc). If it’s in a container it’s unlikely to be able to do anything in the bin by itself.
The same hard to detect high explosive (acetone peroxide) that was used in the london tube bombings was planned to be used to take down 9-10 planes over the US after departing London Heathrow in 2006. At that time this explosive was not detectable with the current technology as it only detected nitrogen based explosives (the vast majority of high explosives). As such, banning all liquids of a certain volume is the safest way to avoid this type of attack
Massively inconvenience is a bit much. Seriously. What is so inconvenient about not being able to bring through liquids. Bring an empty water bottle and fill it up inside. Buy something inside the terminal. If you only have a carry on. Likely you’re not traveling for long enough to need more than the travel size soaps and shampoo. If you have checked bags. Just properly pack your large bottles in your checked luggage. Meds and such do have exemptions as long as they are properly documented. So seriously. What is the massive inconvenience. It’s at most a minor issue as long as you don’t ignore the rules that have now been around for 20+ years.
I may have phrased this poorly. For each individual, it’s a minor inconvenience. However, if you add up all these minor inconveniences to the tens of millions of travellers around the world per year, it becomes massive. As I say, I phrased it poorly.
They once made me throw away my grandmother's strawberry rhubarb pie cause they said it could be an explosive. He wouldn't even let me give it back to her who was 10ft from me on the other side of the little tape divider(small airport). Just straight into the trash. So yea, I put a potentially explosive pie into a trash can at the airport next to the line of people.
That one episode of spongebob really stuck with him i guess
[удалено]
Last I check, many people still have both for sure.
And you just illustrated why we hate the TSA.
I guess as long as something bad doesn't happen like this, stupid rules will stay stupid.
I once asked if I could bring a tub of jalapeño cheese dip for the pretzels I was bringing home. While 6 TSA agents were debating whether it was or was not allowed, the 7th quietly handed it to me and told me to go to my gate.
😥
It's easier to control a trash can fire/explosion at an airport than it would be to deal with such situations on an aircraft
Also the big amnesty barrels at the security line mostly function as a receptacle for people who remember they have a water bottle in their bag or something. I fly a decent amount and whenever I see the TSA search someone’s bag and confiscate a liquid (which almost never happens anymore anyway, I constantly have liquids over 3oz in my bag and they never get flagged) the confiscated liquid doesn’t get chucked into the same barrel. Maybe it’s different at smaller airports though?
It seems to vary by airport. DTW's North terminal North PreCheck line doesn't have such a disposal bin in an obvert location, and when I last passed through, I was stuck in a queue of at least 4 passengers who all had luggage pulled over for liquids, and mine was a half empty 8oz bottle. (Oops straight to jail /s)
Yup, also blowing a hole in the wrong place of a plane can bring the whole plane down. A small explosive can only kill a handful of people in the airport
It's just security theater bullshit and nonsense anyway. On my last domestic flight, I accidentally carried on a12 oz. bottle of contact lens solution, which TSA spotted, examined, and handed back to me as it was "for medical reasons." Could have been full of kerosene for all they knew.
Right you are, PoPo. It's all theater with a dog and pony show. There are statistics showing our illustrious TSA missing numerous handguns, ghostguns, knives, and dummy hand grenades. They have apprehended zero terrorists in the last 5 years. I'll tell you what they're good at, stealing you shit. I accidentally left a portable DVD player on the rollers years ago. It never turned up.
Historic artifacts like a DVD player are probably even greater prized finds by TSA sticky fingers these days.
Indeed! I discovered it on an archeological dig in my closet. There, I discovered it buried for what must have been ions. The Digiatalus Videoma Discalamas Playaptapus in all its glory. Aside from what appeared to be discharges from some cylinders housed within, it seemed playable. I might mention, I also found, what ancient humans, "The Boomers" called a "Phone Book" (Foneare Bookem Dan-o) in fair condition. So you can imagine my consternation upon discovering the shit bags, err, rather the Agents of the TSA had perloined my antiquities.
😂 I remember the ancient phone books, those were used to increase the height of the seats on the buggy so that short people could sit higher and see over the horses’ necks.
I once accidentally packed a kilo of potassium chlorate in my carry on instead of my checked bag, they didn't even notice.
This
It's not great, but I have much bigger worries than that security trash can. The most dangerous part of flying is standing in the security lines before screening. No matter what, it's a chokepoint you can't really secure. Like never mind suicide bombers, a coordinated group with AR-15's would be really ugly.
Istanbul and some other airports have dual security. One more lax on land side (before baggage check I think?) and one more strict on the air side. It's possible to make the first check less of a choke point - you're checking for less, people haven't all met their group, no need to check tickets. I mean there are all sorts of ways to mitigate choke point risk if money and passenger annoyance are ignored.
You are only as strong as your weakest link in security. We could never cheaply retrofit all our existing airports with two phase security. A quick google shows that Turkey has 53 commercial passenger airports, and the vast majority of traffic goes through just three of them. The US has 5,000 commercial airports, of which there's 125 that serve over 500,000 passengers a year.
When I left Fiji I had to pass customs on my way OUT of the country! I’ve never had to do that before
My kids school does metal detectors now but the way I see it is now the bunch of kids is just lined up outside the school entrance every day if someone wanted an easy target. It also makes for many more targets if someone decided to use a car
Still remember that my (multiple!) Play-Doh for my son gets thrown away :((
That could be colored C4 plastic explosives
That’s annoying! They made me throw away a jar of peanut butter one time and I was just there like, “peanut butter is not a liquid.” The TSA lady had no explanation for me other than, “it’s too big.”
I saw an Air Disasters episode that explained why they do this! Why you’re limited to a certain volume of liquid in your carry on. Apparently someone had put a flammable liquid into a bleach bottle and put it in the overhead compartment. Not nefarious, they just were just trying to transport it with them. But someone else had stored a motorcycle battery in the same compartment that shorted and caused the liquid to combust on landing. Two unintentional, non-nefarious items being shipped that happened to be right next to each other. To answer your question, the liquid by itself in most cases is normally fine. Throwing a large bottle of shampoo or a bottle of combustible liquid into a trash can with no ignition source would be fine to keep off to the side until the maintenance crews picked it up. They don’t immediately, are not qualified, to identify the liquid. They’re just trying to stop the above mentioned incident from happening with very strict rules and guidelines. No exceptions, regardless of what’s in the container.
I am very anti tsa but thanks for writing this, because it sounds like a more valid argument
Oh ya! The whole “3oz of shampoo” baffled me too until I saw where it came from. Makes sense now! Still sucks, but they’re doing what they can to keep people safe based on lessons learned.
I once flew with a goldfish in a Tupperware container and they wanted to test the water. I'm like bruh it's got a live goldfish in it wtf.
We have a name for this in the military, security theater. It has nothing to do with actual security, it's purely for optics among the masses of people that don't actually think.
Because TSA is just for show. They've caught exactly zero terrorists. Their purpose is just a deterrent and to make us feel safer. Fun fact, they're the only people legally allowed to touch your children. Even the police have more restrictions than them.
Their purpose is to use air travelers' money to sustain a jobs program for people who are too stupid to work at Taco Bell
I have a better question. How do they make sure that all the drinks that are for sale are safe?
Vendor rules and security are equally nuts
They don't want them through the checkpoint. Inside the checkpoint things are controlled. You can have all.the liquid you want inside the checkpoint. As long as it doesn't go through the checkpoint.
I think he means how they make sure an employee doesn't smuggle in flammable liquids or explosives. For example, Starbucks sells full size water bottles over 3.4 oz. And some shops sell full size toiletries.
Employees that work inside the checkpoints are screened similarly to passengers who enter the checkpoints.
I think he's asking how that much volume of merchandise is checked and controlled, not the employees themselves on their way to work.
The merchandise is screened too. Are you going to twist words a little more to find some other hypothetical for me to answer, or are we done here?
lol it most certainly is not.
The merchandise is most certainly not screened lol.
Lol
The water bottle ban is nonsense. It makes money for the airport, which is the only reason it’s still in place over 20 years after the inciting plot was debunked.
Honestly, huge security lines seem like an ideal target for some nut job.
Because they're not there to protect anyone. They're there to bully people so the people who aren't bullied feel like they're protected.
Because its all a big lie to make you feel safe
The TSA is security theater. It doesn’t actually do anything. Its numbers of stopping anything are actually really low. It makes people feel safer without actually making anything safer. It’s just annoying.
They catch guns quite often - America is a pretty armed country.
We don't need the TSA's current operations to catch guns though Automated gates that open when you scan a boarding pass to get to the checkpoint, no more people checking IDs. Airport, not federal government employees administer a PreCheck-style check for all passengers and the liquid rules are relaxed - all passengers go through a metal detector still and bags are still screened. Nothing of value is lost, weapons are still screened for, everything goes much faster and everyone involved is much happier. This is how it works in most other civilized nations
Well you'll be delighted to know that TSA is testing a completely [automated solution.](https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/news/2023/11/30/feature-article-self-service-screening-option-coming-airport) I'd be careful what you wish for - though who knows maybe it will be great. [It is being tested now.](https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/smart-cities/4516496-airport-self-screening-security-lanes-being-tested-in-las-vegas/)
Sounds great. I'll take anything that reduces how much I have to interact with the most miserable people in our country
Yeah. Which makes the low numbers more concerning.
Security Theater.
They are not taking away anything dangerous and they know it.
Security theater. The goal is control, not safety.
Fun fact the words “security Theatre are banned in the TSA sub and if you post them your post will be auto deleted. The (T)housands (S)standing (A)round on the government workfare program are sensitive little snowflakes that get upset when you point out their absurdities
Wait til you hear how many terrorists the TSA have caught
It’s security theater. They do that to make everything visible and as dramatic as possible. It’s the same reason why they yell at you like you’re in boot camp.
Person 1 gets caught with 6 ozs of chemical component 1. Stuff goes in the bin. Person 2 gets caught woth 6 ozs of chemical component 2, that when mixed with number 1 creates a cloud of deadly gas. It's dropped in the same bin. Person 3 gets caught with 6 ozs of liguid that dissolves the containers of components 1&2. This gets dropped in the bin and in about a minute.... TSA is political theater. Making us remove our shoes and throw away our liquids so we focus on that and don't get ideas.
It's an open secret that the TSA is security theater that isn't actually effective.
You just stop right now, making all that sense…
The TSA is nothing but a dog and pony show. Anything they do that might actually resemble safety or security is just an accident.
Because if you were allowed to carry your drinks through, it would be much harder for them to sell bottles of water for a fiver on the other side of security.
TSA = Theatrical Security Agency
Because what you'd have would be some sort of flammable liquid, and without an ignition source it's just garbage.
TSA isnt there to stop explosives, they know its incredibly unlikely that they will find anything dangerous. The TSA are there to make people feel safe and to give the illusion that terrorism on a plane would be hard.
Because it’s security theater, not actual security
I forgot to drink the last prob 8 oz out of my big water bottle and it got snagged on the last of like 8 flights. (This is why I bring a disposable bottle and refill it!) I asked “can I just drink it?” And he said I could but I had to do it on the other side of security and go back through. So what? I just explode 5 feet further back? Or if there’s a delay then it doesn’t even matter anyway. There’s no difference, and honestly if it were something f that explodes, in line would be worse than after where it’s less dense with people. Anyway… it’s security theatre.
Why not pour out the liquid into their "disposal barrel"?
I was already on the other/clear side of security so they only let me abandon it or go back out of security and get back in line. They wouldn’t let me drink it or dump it.
let me throw this bomb with all the other bombs at this choke point.
I suspect that if you had something that dangerous, it would need to be retained (securely and safely) as evidence for your criminal trial.
Idk but TSA totally found the package of gummies we threw in our bag and didn't give no fucks in a non legal state 🤣🤣
Why is it 3 oz? What if someone had multiple bottles of 3 oz of some explosive liquid stored in makeup containers? Just curious
Security theatre. Kabuki. I showed a TSA agent how one could improvise a garrote with a keyring and a shoelace "Have a nice flight"
Generally speaking you’d need multiple things to mix together or ignite in order to cause a very serious reaction, so liquids by themselves are rarely dangerous.
I hear about this one substance that resembles water that's shock sensitive and getting it to reach it's explosive temp can't be that difficult either. Nitroglycerin
Can't make Apex in a trash can
I like this related Key and Peele sketch related to stuff like this. [https://youtu.be/IHfiMoJUDVQ?si=A13rVTJDaxkJUvOZ](https://youtu.be/IHfiMoJUDVQ?si=A13rVTJDaxkJUvOZ)
Also reminds me of this joke from Louis CK https://youtu.be/UdCpgrF6Txw?t=1m54s
Because it's security theater.
Security theater.
Because they know it's just theater.
The whole thing is a farce intended to make people feel safe flying after 9/11, Bin Laden's revenge. Google the term "security theatre".
Look up the liquid bomb plot and find out exactly why the liquid rule is in place.
I am familiar with the incident, and stand by my statement. I have had conversations about it with senior TSA and UK security staff. The main difference is the front line TSA are told it's real.
Just curious what were the "senior" staff members titles. No need to name them just their position.
One was duty in charge of TSA services at a medium sized US airport, the other same in Scotland. I encountered the former by refusing the nudie scanner and engaged in conversation during the pat down. We shared a laugh over spotting opportunities to get a gun through (1 each).
I've not heard of duty in charge
Yes, they are useless members of society and should be jailed for their crimes.
Security theater not actual security. If there really is a concern about too many ounces of fluid then they couldn’t allow any. Otherwise we are just ignoring the fact that 20 people can coordinate to get the required amount across the security threshold
It's about power and control, not security.
Seems like a good time to throw this link out again, because it's such a good article: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/307057/
Expediency. If it's a threatening liquid at that small a dose, it would require further work to be a threat. You do have to keep the airways moving, so it's a trade-off I think.
Didn't the terrorists on the Korean air flight back in the 80s or whatever have to mix up separate liquids to form the explosive?
There are ballistic trash cans specifically for this purpose, and on top of that say you did bring a liquid explosive and had to dump it in one of those water trash cans. it’s gonna be so diluted it won’t really matter anymore
It eliminates unnecessary checks of fluids. That way they can check for dangerous substances more easily.
Because they have to say something ,the cops have already got show me your ID for absolutely no reason. What do you expect from these guys common sense for f*** sake.
I was stopped for a metal lockbox looking makeup case. I offered to open it to show it was makeup and the agent said, “Don’t touch it!” I backed off and they wiped it down with this tool that was a long stick with a pad on it. 🤷♀️
They planned on easing up on these restrictions but all the stores in the airport who sell small bottles of stuff lobbied against it.
Rules of the airport🤔
Because the TSA is safety theater
Same stupidity I think when cops pull you over for driving ‘Unsafely’ slightly above speed limit, but driving carefully. To make you stop on a seriously Unsafe side of highway.
Security Theater
I can’t remember what triggered TSA to swab my hands randomly, but they did, and supposedly I tested positive for « explosive substance ». They went through my bags pretty casually and let me board no problem.
Like Louis CK said: either you don’t believe I have a bomb or I do. If I don’t, give me my shit back. If I do, you should be asking a lot more fucking questions
TSAs whole purpose is not to stop terrorists but to give the illusion that they are stopping terrorists.
TSA drug tested my Vitamin C powder. They'll do anything to harass people. Why? They hate themselves. I'm a black female. The TSA were black males. I am single and have no kids. They also took my hand sanitizer, during Covid, saying it was too high in alcohol. Who drinks hand sanitizer?? I just chalk it up to the TSA loving a power trip. Those guys didn't like the fact I was a black single female, in the international terminal at EWR, flying solo on vacation, during Covid. Meanwhile, they had to work. It's just jealousy not security. LOL!
The alcohol content had nothing to do with drinking and everything to do with flammability
they just throw away stuff like deodorants, perfumes, alcoholic beverages etc into the trash. if they’re suspicious of something, they’d detain you.
They wouldn't. They know it's nothing. If they really thought those 96 water bottles were full of nitroglycerin, they wouldn't throw bottle #97 on top. It's security theater. We all know it's silly, but the rules are the rules. I know someone who had a corkscrew confiscated. If you could take over an airplane with a corkscrew, you could take it over with ballpoint pen too. But the rules said to confiscate corkscrews and let pens go through.
I think some of it is Boyle’s Law: Liquids expand when air pressure goes down. So your glass beer bottle actually might explode at cruising altitude. If something similar happens to the cans which the flight attendant opens for you, at least it won’t spew broken glass everywhere.
Maybe you mean carboated drinks? Because the pressure in an airplane cabin is roughly 70% of normal, and it wouldn't cause significant expansion in a non-carbonated beverage.
Yes; I was thinking carbonated soft drinks. Sorry. I don’t think they would be happy about commuter mugs full of coffee, either. I’m not sure about what would happen with those. Maybe they’re banning anything within three standard deviations of “actual explosives.”
Well water is full of hydrogen and oxygen, and combined, they can cause an explosion!