You CAN take more than 100ml of drink on a plane

WiseInvestor_2

Firstly, I'd like to say a huge thank you to all those who support the need for increased security at airports. To those who think it's all about social control and financial gain - you're gravely mistaken.

I accept that being made to throw away your water before security whilst being allowed to buy a new one airside may seem unfair, but the fact that security is so tight MAY just make a terrorist think twice before choosing the UK as his next potential target. Why do you think other countries have followed suit? It's not because banning liquids will necessarily make them any safer, but they don't want to be seen as the softest target.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, don't take your issues out on the security staff. They've been given a difficult job under very trying circumstances. If you disagree with the current security legislation then write to Tony Blair. Though somehow I know what kind of response you'll get!

DON'T try to outwit the system - you're merely making their jobs harder, increasing queue lengths and raising the already sky-high tension factor that airports inevitably have.

CLEAR YOUR HAND LUGGAGE of prohibited items, correctly pack your permitted liquids, remove laptops and shoes BEFORE getting to the X-ray machine and above all else, SMILE when you greet the staff. That way, everyone gets through quicker, nobody gets stressed and we all stand a better chance of getting to our destinations alive and on time.

Thank You.

pin

WiseInvestor wrote: »

Firstly, I'd like to say a huge thank you to all those who support the need for increased security at airports. To those who think it's all about social control and financial gain - you're gravely mistaken.

I accept that being made to throw away your water before security whilst being allowed to buy a new one airside may seem unfair, but the fact that security is so tight MAY just make a terrorist think twice before choosing the UK as his next potential target. Why do you think other countries have followed suit? It's not because banning liquids will necessarily make them any safer, but they don't want to be seen as the softest target.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, don't take your issues out on the security staff. They've been given a difficult job under very trying circumstances. If you disagree with the current security legislation then write to Tony Blair. Though somehow I know what kind of response you'll get!

DON'T try to outwit the system - you're merely making their jobs harder, increasing queue lengths and raising the already sky-high tension factor that airports inevitably have.

CLEAR YOUR HAND LUGGAGE of prohibited items, correctly pack your permitted liquids, remove laptops and shoes BEFORE getting to the X-ray machine and above all else, SMILE when you greet the staff. That way, everyone gets through quicker, nobody gets stressed and we all stand a better chance of getting to our destinations alive and on time.

Thank You.

While I don't agree with the stupid security measures, I do agree with this post.

Toto

I agree with any security measures which potentially prevent my family from being blown up. The reason you can buy liquids on the other side is because the airport know the origins of those liquids and are as sure as anyone can be what's in the bottles. I know it all feels like a pain in the bum, but I will gladly go with it. Flying in a big old hunk of metal way tooo high in the sky is scary enough without the added worry of a petrol bomb or a bottle of pilot killing juice being on board.

gump

Sorry but haven't we missed the point here??? Whether it is or is not and inconvenience is irrelevant. We all seem to have too short memories when it comes to airline security.
I fly very regularily and I would sooner put my things in my hold luggage or buy it having passed through security rather than not get there at all!!!
Why does everyone have to take so much on board with them anyway?

jinkssick

moonrakerz wrote: »

This whole area just goes to show what a farce much of this airline "security" is.

You can't take a plastic bottle of Tesco's water or your toe nail clippers through security, but you can buy a bottle of whisky in the 'duty free' and take that onto the aircraft.

1. Pour the whisky onto your seat and set light to it - instant fire bomb !
2. Hold bottle by neck, smash on metal frame of your seat - superb weapon !

The whole thing is stupid !

it worries me that someone thanked you but its very true.

mistyarthur

It is quite hard to get the fluids airside in europe and america because even flights connecting from poor countries that let you bring everything onto the plane check your baggage for the prohibited items now before you can board the flight connecting you.

pin

gump wrote: »

Sorry but haven't we missed the point here??? Whether it is or is not and inconvenience is irrelevant. We all seem to have too short memories when it comes to airline security.
I fly very regularily and I would sooner put my things in my hold luggage or buy it having passed through security rather than not get there at all!!!
Why does everyone have to take so much on board with them anyway?

Ok, putting everything in hold. Fair enough, but two things: (1) baggage handling is WELL known to be shoddy at best, broken baggage, missing baggage, etc and (2) at the other end you have to wait AGES to get your bags back.

As for buying stuff after security, hmm, the prices are not exactly that cheap.

nearlyrich

Just back from a touring holiday which included a lot of air travel and many different airports and checks, we went through some airports more than once and the security changed from day to day. I don't mind being checked for potential threats at any airport but I would feel more secure if they all adopted a common process and criteria.
The most annoying thing is having to go through the full security check whilst in transit where you have had no opportunity to buy anything from outside and with a tight transfer window (sometimes due to late arrival of a flight etc,) it can cost you a flight. There should be a transfer channel to fast track people through who have already been cleared.

WiseInvestor_2

You've said yourself that security screening is a variable entity, so surely re-screening before every flight is better than allowing a potential threat to slip through the net?

There are a number of airports where British Airways also have their own security search just before you board the aircraft, because the local security procedures are not deemed tight enough. So you could end up being searched 3 times, but I'd rather that than risk the alternative.

I know it's frustrating but it's better to be safe than sorry.

Sam_Bee

And to answer the question, or the statement 'You CAN take more than 100ml of drink on a plane', yes you can. Easily. You buy it in boots or WH Smith once you've passed through customs. Water - 2 bottles £1.50, not a rip-off, coke, even DEADLY Ribena.

However the rest of this is completely pointless, it is the rules, you all know them, they are there for a reason, i'm happy they are there, as I know people have tried to blow-up planes using stuff in their shoes! Devious these terrorists. And unfortunately planes, particularly ones from Britain are seen as very symbolic targets.

If you don't like them DON'T FLY! Yes, i'm peeved because I lost aftershave balm, toothpaste, etc to the tune of £15 last month at 5am at Stansted, but the guy was apologetic, and I knew, just because i'd forgot to get some plastic bags to put them, it was my own fault.

You have to make the personal choice if you find these 'intrusive' security measures too much. If they are, they don't accept them. Don't fly. I can't believe that someone tried to get round them by taking in ice! As far as i'm concerned, he wasn't clever for trying to circumnavigate security rules put in place to protect us, he should have had it taken off him, his hand-luggage intensively searched, his body-cavities inspected (at length) his checked-in luggage taken off the plane to be searched at length. If he missed his plane, fine.