Checking In

Frequent fliers wear their protest

Tue Nov 21, 10:05 PM ET

I suppose it was inevitable. Someone has started selling T-shirts and baseball jerseys with a picture of a plastic bag of carry-on articles under the headline "Kip Hawley is an Idiot!"

Hawley is chief of the Transportation Security Administration, the agency responsible for instituting first the outright ban of all liquids inflight, and then the 3-3-1 travel policy (maximum 3-ounce containers carried in a single, quart-sized zip-top baggie). Seasoned business travelers tend to be critical of the policy, and they are raising their voices in an increasingly organized way.

The shirts, selling for around $20, are the symbol of a burgeoning activism among frequent fliers who consider the rules a waste of time. Recent threads on flyertalk.com describe frequent travelers gleefully donning the T-shirts as a tease to test the reactions from

TSA airport workers.

"Superguy", a United Premier Executive and self-described member of ASS — (the "Anti-Shoe Carnival Society") — writes in a post last Sunday about wearing the shirt upon arrival at Reagan National Airport. "I was quite surprised by the reaction I got from TSA at DCA. They stopped me as I went through, read my shirt, and laughed hard. They asked me where I got the shirt ... It at least showed me those guys thought the rules were stupid.''

If this all seems a bit juvenile, remember that this little protest movement got started because one traveler thought his first amendment rights had been violated. In September, after the TSA changed from its "no liquids" policy to the current one, frequent flier Ryan Bird was fed up.

He wrote the phrase, "Kip Hawley is an Idiot!" on his toiletry zip lock bag. Instead of getting a laugh, TSA staff detained him at the airport. On his Web site, Bird claims the TSA told him that his first amendment rights of expression did not apply when going through security. Other travelers started mimicking Bird's baggie protest; a movement was born.

And every movement needs a T-shirt.  

Write to: Barbara Correa at bboydstoncorrea@yahoo.com

 

Next: Complaint blog takes flight
Previous: Airline marriage a mixed bag for travelers

RECOMMEND THIS STORY

Recommend It:

Average (Not Rated)

0.0 stars
» Recommended Stories

Comments

Join the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 - 9 of 9
  • First
  • < Previous
  • Next >
  • Last
1
I agree about the stupidity of the whole thing. I recently returned home from a trip to Hawaii, while in Hawaii I bought a bottle of lotion for a friend forgot that I had it in my carry on and was detained by security. I was told to either toss it mail it home (for the low fee of $7.00 yeah right, the lotion was only 9.00) or stay in Hawaii, I did consider the last option but well reality set in. I was fuming about the whole thing standing their like an idiot when really nice gentleman comes up to me and tells me what I needed to do to get it home with me. So I guess I have resorted to being a criminal now smuggling a bottle of lotion into the mainland from Hawaii. I know that I could have put it in my checked bag but by the time I got to security my checked bag was already gone. Security only had to open the bottle take a snif and realize it was lotion. I think that a law that is created to turn an honest person into a criminal is just wrong. and the really sad part is that if there was something sinister about my lotion they didn't stop it from getting on the plane in the first place. They just succeeded in irritating me.
Posted by marytoddliz on Thu, Dec 14, 2006 2:11 PM ET
2
If you're a Democrat, Third Party, Anti-Bush, or even a Faux News-loving Fascist who hates to be inconvenienced when he realizes that TSA won't give him special treatment; you are needed to band together to get rid of the TSA and make Security Rational and Sane again like it was before 9/11. Terrorism flaring up is Bush's fault and he needs to pay!
Posted by xldggiptolwtfx on Sun, Dec 17, 2006 11:50 PM ET
3
A secure cockpit door and a closed circuit in-cockpit camera is all that is required to prevent another 9/11. The poor TSA workers have to comply with the "looking busy = security" doctrine.
Posted by repete66208 on Mon, Dec 18, 2006 12:09 AM ET
4
The rules on liquids come from that British case. The sad part is that anyone who really wished to and has the appropriate knowledge can get anything they needed to aboard any aircraft short of a complete strip search and NO CARRY ON!Smuglers or mules have been doing it for years.The rules discourage amateurs and wannabe's.
Posted by mes_312 on Mon, Dec 18, 2006 12:11 AM ET
5
I am a democrate, but even i understand that some freedoms need to be relenquished. Lighters used to be permited, but when they changed the rule on that I threw mine out, and settles for matches that they give for free at most airports. Flying is a privledge not a right, and it's not the fault of anyone that we have to adhere to these rules. Although I am not really sure how terrorists plan to take us down with a lighter and some gatorade, I can respect that these rules are for our safety. it's like a parent who knows what's best for a child. We may not agree with them, but mom and dad are always right.
Posted by npw5007 on Mon, Dec 18, 2006 12:16 AM ET
6
there is absolutely no way these rules are in place for our safety. terrorists who are trained are able to sneak whatever they need on board completely undetected. there is no reason my toddler should have to start crying because i had to throw her drink away before boarding the plane because there may be a chance that she may be carrying a weapon of mass destruction. earth to bush, hawley, and the tsa: if you can drink it without gagging, it probably can't kill anyone, let alone explode. what next, am i going to have to check my breasts with my luggage because they produce liquid? this anti-terrorism dog-and-pony show is getting out of hand.
Posted by everthoughtfulsleeperslie on Mon, Dec 18, 2006 1:44 AM ET
7
Right - it's STUPID until someone sneaks some liquid onto a plane and blows it up. Then you'll all be whining about why the authorities didn't take precautions against that kind of thing happening. So sorry for the inconvenience of actually having to pack your liquids in your check on luggage, but my safety is more important than you carrying some facial moisturizer.
Posted by allusian_fields on Sun, Dec 24, 2006 1:52 PM ET
8
frequent travellers must have a all-in-one travel kit..www.bonjourhk.com
Posted by plswong2001 on Wed, Feb 7, 2007 11:26 PM ET
9
If having to take my shoes off and carry my personals in my check baggage in order to fly, so be it. Same people complaining were the ones saying security wasn't good enough on 9-11. Better safe (and a little annoyed)than sorry.
Posted by robthatlonghair on Fri, Jan 18, 2008 1:30 AM ET
  • 1 - 9 of 9
  • First
  • < Previous
  • Next >
  • Last