It is when I'm through with it.

Maybe he thought your 4" blade was half a pair of scissors?

Seriously, 4" pointed scissors are allowed, but they will confiscate a swiss army knife with a 2" blade.

Liquid or not, it's a fact that pudding kills more people than knives and guns combined.
Delicious, and deadly!

Oh those wacky TSA agents!

pudding: just one more household good that you can terrorize with.

oh the possibilities!

TSA people are morons. Literally, they don't think at all, and just push through a lot of crap. We're not any safer with what's going on, it's just a lot more aggravating. I'm sure there will be at least one paranoid fool lambasting me and my opinion, but it's an honest one. The liquid ban is based on the idea that you can make a binary explosive out of two seperate liquids. The Ask The Pilot column in Salon linked to an article in The Guardian right after the liquids ban took place. The Guardian article explained how to make the binary explosive you'd have to mix highly sensitive chemicals for over an hour (drop by drop, so you don't combine too quickly and cause a premature explosion with too little force to cause the damage you want to) and not have anyone notice your prolonged use of said bathroom or the fact that one of the chemicals is an acid with a terrible oder. In addtion, you have to swipe a source of ice (in the article, they talked about flying first class, ordering champagne, and swiping the ice bucket into the bathroom) and not have anyone notice you taking that into the restroom for the hour+ time frame. So, right off the bat, the liquid ban is bullshit. (I can't find a link to the article, but if you know the one I'm talking about, I'd love it.)

Awhile after the liquid ban I flew from Detroit. I remembered the ban and tossed the last 1/4 ounce of my shaving balm into my pack. When I get there, the guy tells me I can't have it since the bottle size is .5 ounces over the limit (it was 3.5, or 4.5, I can't remember). I explained, I know the bottle is bigger, but you're holding it, and there's barely any left. He refused to think like a human being, and simply began reciting verbatim a canned response. These people are idiots and I don't understand how we can be entrusting them with our safety.

Well, at least you got to keep your knife. Those are great knives. I've got the same (or similar) version in red and love it.

Question: was the pudding really over 3oz in volume?

@bigTrue:
He refused to think like a human being, and simply began reciting verbatim a canned response.

Not to invalidate anything else you said, for I find many of these regulations ridiculous, but at my work, there are many policies that I myself find stupid or don't agree with. However, I can't go against them because they are policy and it's not worth my job. In those cases, I usually end up doing what this person did - stay to the script, repeat the policy until I've made it clear that there is nothing that I can do. It's easier than trying to reason with someone most of the time, and safer for my job too.

@bigTrue: I explained, I know the bottle is bigger, but you're holding it, and there's barely any left. He refused to think like a human being, and simply began reciting verbatim a canned response. These people are idiots and I don't understand how we can be entrusting them with our safety.

Even better, if the bottle doesn't have a size marked on the outside, they don't do anything about it. I was bringing sunscreen and lotion through and was flagged over for extra search, and they took out my little bag with both the sunscreen and the lotion. He takes a look at the sunscreen, which is like 6-8oz or something, and proceeds to cite the fact that he needs to take it. I explain and show theres barely any left, and he doesn't care. His answer "It says 8oz."

So he picks up the lotion, which is in a generic plastic bottle that I bought at Target or something, to fill myself. It was the exact same size as the sunscreen bottle, but no sticker or anything. It was about half full, he looks around it and tosses it back in the bag.

So I ask, you're going to take my sunscreen with barely any left but let me keep the lotion? His answer "it doesn't have the size marked, it's good." It blew me away that not only could an individual be this idiotic, but it was reflected up the chain.

Mmmm... forbidden pudding...

The TSA folks were cooperating with each other.

It was getting close to break time and the TSA folks were looking for a snack.

Now they just needed some bananas and vanilla wafers for a real party.

@enm4r:

That's weird, because at the airport in Gulfport, Mississippi, the screener made a big stink about how my generic plastic toiletry bottles didn't have the size marked, so she couldn't tell if they were over 3 ounces (they weren't).

She threatened to confiscate the bottles. I was on my return trip, so I didn't care, and I told her as much. She ended up grumbling and letting me keep the bottles and their contents. But the line had been held up because this woman wanted to pick a fight. Seeing as how she could make me miss my flight, I chose not to argue with her, even though she was wrong.

Not only was she an incompetent idiot -- she was an incompetent idiot on a powertrip.

@Lin-Z: If you have even seen any of the German sex video's you would know just how dangerous pudding can be....

I think the liquids ban is fucking insane. 4oz is apparently enough of something to cause enough damage to an airplane to cause detrimental harm? But like in the SNL sketch, what if a a bunch people all bring 3oz each and combine it later?

I think the biggest cause of the insane paranoia is because of Die Hard with a Vengeance. That was the one where they have the two liquids that mix with each other and instantly and suddenly become a huge explosive liquid.

Pudding's probably a colloid. Or maybe a gel.

yeah i think it is a colloid

Speaking of incompetent idiots on a powertrip, last time I had to change planes at LAX, the screener told me that I couldn't bring my toiletries through because the generic plastic bottles I put them in DIDN'T HAVE ANY TEXT ON THEM. I started to argue, but was worried that we were going to miss our plane (and we were headed home anyway).

So, clearly, if I would have put my sunscreen in a sample bottle from, say, aveda shampoo, it would be perfectly safe, but having it in an unmarked bottle is dangerous. Idiot. It's not like she could read anyway.

@Nemesis_Enforcer:
(and Lin-Z)

don't forget about Barry & Lavone's $240 worth of pudding... [www.youtube.com]

Kudos for the pictures showing a juxtaposition of the knife and a secure area. Not too many people would think to capture a picture in that way (though I might have chosen an airplane sitting at the boarding gate thru the window in the background).

Liquids and gels have been used by Al-Queda to kill people on planes before.
(read [en.wikipedia.org])

Liquids and gels can blow an entire airliner right out of the sky. Terrorists armed with knives, while dangerous, do not pose the same threat level.

To those who claim liquid explosives are figments of the imaginations of Hollywood and the TSA, I suggest you put a vial of nitroglycerin in your car and safely transporting it along with yourself and your family from now on. Imagine how cool you will be to prove the TSA wrong.

I work for TSA. For those calling us morons most of us are ex-military and just using this job as a entry level to be in a higher paying goverment job. I'm currently working part-time and I'm a full-time student working on getting my Bachelor in Criminal Justice.

@bigTrue: "I explained, I know the bottle is bigger, but you're holding it, and there's barely any left. He refused to think like a human being, and simply began reciting verbatim a canned response. These people are idiots and I don't understand how we can be entrusting them with our safety."

As stupid as this rule sounds, we don't want to risk getting fire from a government job just so that you can have your 1oz left of shaving lotion.

You guys want to blame us for not catching these stuff you guys should see the machines we have to work with. These 70's-80's machines are really outdated and most of the time we have to guess what the items are. Thank god we are getting new machines sometime next year.

@DADCOOKS "The TSA folks were cooperating with each other. It was getting close to break time and the TSA folks were looking for a snack. Now they just needed some bananas and vanilla wafers for a real party."

Hahaha.

I initally thought it was "Knives with blades under six inches." TSA's website says "Any knife except for plastic or butter knives". Okay... I guess a TSA employee didn't get the memo that day.

@Consumer-X: "Terrorists armed with knives, while dangerous, do not pose the same threat level."

We're looking at the same data, but I draw the opposite conclusion.

According to the wikipedia link you pasted, the Bojinka plot was only a *plot* and never actually materialized. So, zero casualties.

The hijackers on 9/11 used boxcutters - essentially knives - to seize control of the planes. Around 3,000 people killed.

I guess he thought the pudding was made in China and had lead in it.

@Consumer-X: You've been watching entirely too much Die Hard.

Nitroglycerine is not feasible as an incendiary because it is HIGHLY UNSTABLE. You are more likely to blow up on the way to the airport than you are to blow up AT the airport. Furthermore, there are NO LIQUID EXPLOSIVES that are safe or reliable enough to be transported to or through airports.

The few explosive compounds which can be mixed as liquids have very little power in the small amounts required during mixing, and have a high likelihood of blowing up while being mixed, killing none but the attempted suicide bomber, and causing at MOST a very minor amount of damage to the intended target.

@ZzFDKzZ: I love how "I was just following orders" keeps popping up as an excuse. Disgusting. You've got a brain, you know.

I've gotten away with carrying a insect-bite gel in my carry-on through international security. I'd forgotten it was in there, honest.

When I traveled with Greyhound a few years ago, my bus got picked out for the random security screening and those guys didn't find my mace spray. Of course they didn't seem to be to well trained either.

@RossMcD:
Awww yeeaah! I always knew that there had to be another Barry & Lavone fan out there, and somehow I'm not surprised I found them on the Consumerist. Awwww yeah!

@Buran:

ZzFDKzZ has a brain. His brain is working. Like this: Take some schlub's pudding, or lose my paycheck. I love to see how vociferously people stand on principles from the comfort of their armchairs.

Personally, I'd feel safer if there was *NO* screening at this point than what the TSA does. A false sense of security is far worse than no security.

The liquid ban makes no sense whatsoever. Worse, is that they allow LIGHTERS onto a plane, but not a bottle of water? WTF? What the TSA is forgetting is that everything you need to hijack/crash a plane is already on the plane.

If we're not willing to pay for quality, security PROFESSIONALS, let's just get rid of the rent-a-cops and make everyone's life easier (and safer!).

You are now flying armed and delicious

I wonder what would happen if one was to hide a bomb in the backpack and toss in a few puddings to throw the hungry TSA agents off...

"Hello, we have some pudding, everyone stay calm".

TSA: Too Stupid for Arby's.

@Consumer-X: Chemistry wasn't your favourite subject, was it?

Having degrees in chemistry, engineering, and electroincs, and have conducted had many nefarious experiments in high school and also in college (nitrating tolulene was one of my favs), I can assure you, RVLESHRAC's got it right on this one. Anything explosive easily brought on in an airplane cabin isn't likely to take down a plane. Anything that really could cause that much damage is probably not going to be stable enough to carry onto the plane, nor would you have the time & equipment necessary to make it happen.

Do you happen to remember the Aloha Airlines flight 243? Total failure of the fuselage with a safe & admittedly scary landing. The airframe of a plane is quite strong. It's quite amazing how much of a plane you have to damage to send it down. The engineering is quite amazing, probably some of the best-designed and most thought-out creations man has ever done.

I still say, until they are willing to inspect the cargo that goes on the plane (not what the passengers check-in, I mean the actual cargo that just about every flight has on-board), there's no reason to bother with the passengers. Sure, there's talk of bomb-proof shipping containers, but they're not widely used. It's down near the cargo where the vulnerable parts of a plane are (electrical, hydraulic lines, etc)

I usually carry an empty water bottle through security and fill it from a water fountain once I've gotten through. Last time I went through security, though, I had forgotten to empty the bottle and there was a small amount of water in it (maybe 4-6 ounces).

Of course, the TSA guy found it and told me I couldn't take it through. I admitted that I meant to bring it through empty and asked if I could drink what was left in the bottle and then go on. He said no, I couldn't do that in the security area, but if I wanted to I could leave the security area the way I came, drink the water and then come back.

Considering the line I'd finally made it through, I elected to hand over the bottle instead (it's about a $15 bottle, not a huge deal)... but WTF?

@Buran: "I love how "I was just following orders" keeps popping up as an excuse. Disgusting. You've got a brain, you know."

Only way to keep the cash flowing.

@Joe_Bagadonuts:

Huge fan! I think The State was the best sketch comedy since monty python, hands down. UCB got pretty good in the 2nd & 3rd season but wasn't at the level of the state.

Supposedly they're releasing it on DVD in september. This page was linked to from the offical state web page: [www.myspace.com] I haven't seen anything about it on amazon, but I hope it's for real!

The stella episodes from comedy central are also out on DVD, I've been meaning to check that out too.

The ridiculous part of it all, is that if you really want to bring something on an airplane... just put it in your pocket. I am a smoker and hate having to scrounge around for a lighter after a long flight. As such, my "banned" plastic 'Bic' lighter goes in my pocket and I stroll right through security. When its in the bag, they can see it. When its in your pocket, it doesn't exist.

My favourite is when the news in Ecuador reported on the atrocious state of airport security in the U.S. The TSA did a test by putting a water bottle and a fake bomb in several suitcases. Most times the water bottle was confiscated but the fake bomb wasn't.

@dfellars: You can bring lighters on now, openly and notoriously:

[www.tsa.gov]

@dfellars: Ordinary lighters like that aren't banned anymore.

@howie_in_az: Good job. Now you've given all the terrorists that read the Consumerist a near perfect plan. Good thing you didn't specify which flavor of pudding to use, or else I'd have to call you a traitor.

TSA just confiscated my starbucks coffee, but missed a lighter i had forgotten was in my carry-on. They didn't even offer to "hand-inspect" the coffee. oh well...

To my dear friends ROSSMCD, RVLESHRAC, and FLCONSUMER:

ROSSMCD said:
"According to the wikipedia link you pasted, the Bojinka plot was only a *plot* and never actually materialized. So, zero casualties."

RVLESHRAC said:
"Furthermore, there are NO LIQUID EXPLOSIVES that are safe or reliable enough to be transported to or through airports."

FLCONSUMER said:
"Anything explosive easily brought on in an airplane cabin isn't likely to take down a plane. Anything that really could cause that much damage is probably not going to be stable enough to carry onto the plane, nor would you have the time & equipment necessary to make it happen."

YET:

The test:
"On December 11, 1994, Yousef built another bomb, which had one tenth of the power that his final bombs were planned to have, in the lavatory of an aircraft. He left it inside the life jacket under his seat, 26K, and got off the plane when it arrived in Cebu. Yousef had boarded the flight under the assumed name of Armaldo Forlani, using a false Italian passport. The aircraft was Philippine Airlines Flight 434 on a Manila to Narita route, stopping partway at Cebu. Yousef had set the timer for four hours after he got off the aircraft. The bomb exploded while the aircraft was over Minami Daito Island, near Okinawa, Japan. A Japanese businessman named Haruki Ikegami was killed after the bomb detonated. The Boeing 747-200 safely made an emergency landing in Naha, Okinawa. None of the aircraft's other 272 passengers or any members of the crew were killed, although 10 passengers in front of Ikegami were injured. Yousef then planned which flights to attack for Phase I."

The bomb:
The "Mark II" "microbombs" had Casio digital watches as the timers, stabilizers that looked like cotton wool balls, and an undetectable nitroglycerin as the explosive. Other ingredients included glycerin, nitrate, sulfuric acid, and minute concentrations of nitrobenzene, silver azide (silver trinitride), and liquid acetone. Two 9-volt batteries in each bomb were used as a power source. The batteries would be connected to light bulb filaments that would detonate the bomb. Murad and Yousef wired an SCR as the switch to trigger the filaments to detonate the bomb. There was an external socket hidden when the wires were pushed under the watch base as the bomber would wear it. The alteration was so small that the watch could still be worn in a normal manner.
Yousef got batteries past airport security during his December 11 test bombing of Philippine Airlines Flight 434 by hiding them in hollowed-out heels of his shoes. Yousef smuggled the nitroglycerin on board by putting it inside a contact lens solution bottle.

Rather than bitch about TSA drones, why not take your complaints where they belong? Management of TSA and Homeland Security? THAT is where the decision on liquids and semi-liquids were made. I can guarantee that most TSA people don't care about your water or starbucks, but have been told 'stop them' and that is their job.

I read somewhere, and don't recall where, that a good portion of TSA's purpose is to make people feel that -some- effort is being taken when, in reality, there's not a lot that can be done in some situations. (I recall that some flights leaving California on 9/11 were found to have box cutters taped to the bottom of seats, suggesting inside job, not just passengers sneaking on weapons.)

At least you're still allowed a carry-on or two. After the liquid issue in Britain, British airlines banned carry-ons entirely for awhile.

I think that a terrorist could make a much more effective bomb out of Lithium Ion batteries. But, those most of the time just burst into flames. Hell, if he could produce the heat, he could just burn salt and create a chlorine gas cloud (I know it takes a lot of heat, more than he could possible produce on a plane.). Why is it that we are all worried about airlines? More people are killed in car crashes in a year than that are killed on a plane. I'm more worried getting hit in a car accident than of a terrorist attack. If you want a secure flight, no clothes, every cavity searched, all cargo carried in the hold, and only water and bread served. All crew is naked and searched as well. That is secure. Actually, you could use those little cameras doctors shove up your butt to find cancer to find anyone who tries to put a string of cherry bombs up there. I will never fly, unless my job demands it of me. If I want to go intercontinental, I'll sail. You are more likely to win the lottery or get hit and killed by a meteorite than get attacked by a terrorist (in the US, or many of the EU nations). This is all fear mongering. If you look up the definition of 'terrorism': 1. the act of terrorizing; use of of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such as use as a political weapon or policy 2. the demoralization and intimidation produced in this way. (Source; "Webster's NewWorld Dictionary; Second College Edition 1986 [I know its old]"
Basically I could call the TSA terrorists since they use FEAR to incorporate all the idiotic bans.I could call our government that too. It fits the definition. Use fear to make people scared of the terrorist boogie men and give up our right guaranteed to us in the Bill or Rights.

The TSA and that entire system is run by imbeciles. I went thru the same security area (Sacto) and they flagged my briefcase for hand search. They didn't even look at my cell phone, GPS, or anything else, but they confiscated my 3 1/2 oz tube of SUNBLOCK. I couldn't believe it, but I held my tongue and didn't argu with them because they can make your life totally miserable... and they know they can.

@Consumer-X: So... thousands dead from terrorists with boxcutters vs. 1 dead, 10 injured by a guy with liquid nitro? You're not helping your case.

I think what's hilarious is people think we're winning the war on terror. The terrorists don't want us all dead. They want us to live long lives looking over our shoulders and second guessing everything we do. All this rediculous security at airports is what they WANTED. Every little bit they can do to make our lives that much more inconvenient is their goal.

The terrorists have already won. King George II has done nothing to make us any degree safer (Osama is still around btw) and has just made our lives a bit more shitty.