New Carry On Luggage Rules

[NakaNaka]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: monk3y
This whole situation is so annoying. But if it means it will get others and myself safely through a flight. I'm all for it.

Saw a quote from a 24 year old chick out of the UK "it will be inconvient to not have my iPod for 8 hours." I was thinking, "TWIT! It would be real inconvient to DIAF too." Some folks priorities are just monkeyed up. It is not like you can't live without one for a freaking plane flight. You weren't born with it. sigh

/rant

Well, you're strapped to a chair with about 3 inches between you and someone else. The in-flight entertainment is terrible (and if I understand this, you can't even bring your own headphones to listen to it - needless to say, any airline-issued headphones, which I've never heard of, would be stupid uncomfortable in the pursuit of sterility), and there's prettymuch nothing to do. Even people who do nothing at work for 8 hours a day have more amusement at their disposal than that. It will make many people very uncomfortable. I know it would make me uncomfortable.

Agreed. Safety is the number one concern. I would rather be handcuffed to my chair with rats running around my feet than dying in a terrorist attack. But if it is not going to affect security (which I don't think a lot of the things you are normally allowed to bring on do) I want my laptop, my ipod, my headphones etc when I travel between New York and London. My instinct is for the next week or two, Heathrow, etc will be very strict and then allow electronics and everything back on.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: monk3y
This whole situation is so annoying. But if it means it will get others and myself safely through a flight. I'm all for it.

Saw a quote from a 24 year old chick out of the UK "it will be inconvient to not have my iPod for 8 hours." I was thinking, "TWIT! It would be real inconvient to DIAF too." Some folks priorities are just monkeyed up. It is not like you can't live without one for a freaking plane flight. You weren't born with it. sigh

/rant

That isn't the point. The point is that terrorism is working, they're disrupting our daily lives and the freedoms we're used to.

Ummmm...no. The point of terrorism is to kill as many innocent people as possible to get what you want because they can't hope to stand up militarily to countries like the US and UK. See Spain.

 

[Vic]

It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

oh just wait until they can implement the next set of rules. they are chomping at the bit to get those out there. they are just sitting quietly right now collecting dust on the "Future Rules" shelf.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Thats how th government chisels away those freedoms.


Just like the seatbelt laws.. at first they could only ticket you if they pulled you over for something else, and they said it would never be a reason to get pulled over.... LIE.

I remember that.
And I know why they changed it. Has nothing to do with safety. Traffic tickets are a good source of income for the state.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

oh just wait until they can implement the next set of rules. they are chomping at the bit to get those out there. they are just sitting quietly right now collecting dust on the "Future Rules" shelf.

I have no doubt that committees are working on them as we speak. Every organization seeks to justify its own existence.

 

[ed21x]

hey, seeing as how what would've been a 9-11 like catastrophe was averted today, and a regulation that everyone can clearly see the purpose of is set in place for the near future, it sounds perfectly reasonable.

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: gsellis

Originally posted by: monk3y
This whole situation is so annoying. But if it means it will get others and myself safely through a flight. I'm all for it.

Saw a quote from a 24 year old chick out of the UK "it will be inconvient to not have my iPod for 8 hours." I was thinking, "TWIT! It would be real inconvient to DIAF too." Some folks priorities are just monkeyed up. It is not like you can't live without one for a freaking plane flight. You weren't born with it. sigh

/rant

That isn't the point. The point is that terrorism is working, they're disrupting our daily lives and the freedoms we're used to.

Ummmm...no. The point of terrorism is to kill as many innocent people as possible to get what you want because they can't hope to stand up militarily to countries like the US and UK. See Spain.

I wasn't aware we were discussing the point of terrorism?

Man some of you guys are just itching for an argument.. pretty easy to tell when you start your response with "ummmmmm.. no" and then proceed to go completely off topic.

 

[ManSnake]

Originally posted by: ed21x
hey, seeing as how what would've been a 9-11 like catastrophe was averted today, and a regulation that everyone can clearly see the purpose of is set in place for the near future, it sounds perfectly reasonable.

It's reasonable to you because you probably only get on to an airplane once or twice a year. To those who have to fly every week, it's a pain in the ass.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Platypus
I wasn't aware we were discussing the point of terrorism?

Man some of you guys are just itching for an argument.. pretty easy to tell when you start your response with "ummmmmm.. no" and then proceed to go completely off topic.

Come again?

Originally posted by: Platypus
That isn't the point. The point is that terrorism is working, they're disrupting our daily lives and the freedoms we're used to.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

oh just wait until they can implement the next set of rules. they are chomping at the bit to get those out there. they are just sitting quietly right now collecting dust on the "Future Rules" shelf.

I have no doubt that committees are working on them as we speak. Every organization seeks to justify its own existence.

You act as if they have a crystal ball and can see into the future. If so, nothing bad would ever happen.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Well, you're strapped to a chair with about 3 inches between you and someone else. The in-flight entertainment is terrible (and if I understand this, you can't even bring your own headphones to listen to it - needless to say, any airline-issued headphones, which I've never heard of, would be stupid uncomfortable in the pursuit of sterility), and there's prettymuch nothing to do. Even people who do nothing at work for 8 hours a day have more amusement at their disposal than that. It will make many people very uncomfortable. I know it would make me uncomfortable.

While boring, not always a complete loss
Inseat music

Movies are The Sentinel and Over the Hedge.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

oh just wait until they can implement the next set of rules. they are chomping at the bit to get those out there. they are just sitting quietly right now collecting dust on the "Future Rules" shelf.

I have no doubt that committees are working on them as we speak. Every organization seeks to justify its own existence.

You act as if they have a crystal ball and can see into the future. If so, nothing bad would ever happen.

Not even remotely. Obviously, you misunderstand my point entirely. Quite the opposite, my point was that they furiously double-deadbolt the barn door after the horse has already gotten out.

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Platypus
I wasn't aware we were discussing the point of terrorism?

Man some of you guys are just itching for an argument.. pretty easy to tell when you start your response with "ummmmmm.. no" and then proceed to go completely off topic.

Come again?

Originally posted by: Platypus
That isn't the point. The point is that terrorism is working, they're disrupting our daily lives and the freedoms we're used to.

Read it slowly this time, THE POINT OF HER ARGUMENT, not the point of terrorism.

 

[Deleted member 4644]

I would be happy to not have a laptop in exchage for not DIAF. But that's just me.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Platypus
I wasn't aware we were discussing the point of terrorism?

Man some of you guys are just itching for an argument.. pretty easy to tell when you start your response with "ummmmmm.. no" and then proceed to go completely off topic.

Come again?

Originally posted by: Platypus
That isn't the point. The point is that terrorism is working, they're disrupting our daily lives and the freedoms we're used to.

Read it slowly this time, THE POINT OF HER ARGUMENT, not the point of terrorism.

And you were saying that terrorism is working because it disrupts our daily lives. That's like saying Nazism and facism worked during WWII because there was rationing here in the USA. Terrorism only works when you appease and give into it.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

It's interesting that if they didn't have these new rules already written up, people would be asking why they weren't prepared. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't it seems. Really, do you think they've just been waiting for the day when they could ban shampoo from planes?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Platypus

Read it slowly this time, THE POINT OF HER ARGUMENT, not the point of terrorism.

I don't think the UK chick was trying to make any point about terrorism, I think she was just whining that she can't listen to her iPod for 8 hours. I think it's funny that you criticized Queasy for being argumentative because he disagreed with you, when you disagreed with him first... is all.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

oh just wait until they can implement the next set of rules. they are chomping at the bit to get those out there. they are just sitting quietly right now collecting dust on the "Future Rules" shelf.

I have no doubt that committees are working on them as we speak. Every organization seeks to justify its own existence.

You act as if they have a crystal ball and can see into the future. If so, nothing bad would ever happen.

Not even remotely. Obviously, you misunderstand my point entirely. Quite the opposite, my point was that they furiously double-deadbolt the barn door after the horse has already gotten out.

the horse didn't get out this time.

why you complaining about airport security measures anyway?

 

[kami333]

Sweet, they won't take responsibility if you check your valuables and they get lost but they won't let you carry it on.

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: Vic
It's interesting how they have these new rules already written up and just need some kind of excuse in order to implement them.

link to where these rules were already written up? how long ago where they written? is there any aluminum foil on sale this week?

 

[ManSnake]

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I would be happy to not have a laptop in exchage for not DIAF. But that's just me.

Yup you are just a wimp. Die in a mid-air explosion is painless and quick. You are going to die sooner or later anyway.

 

[gsethi]

Originally posted by: ManSnake

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I would be happy to not have a laptop in exchage for not DIAF. But that's just me.

Yup you are just a wimp. Die in a mid-air explosion is painless and quick. You are going to die sooner or later anyway.

Do you speak from experience ?

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: ManSnake

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I would be happy to not have a laptop in exchage for not DIAF. But that's just me.

Yup you are just a wimp. Die in a mid-air explosion is painless and quick. You are going to die sooner or later anyway.

Wrong. What they would have done would destroy the structural integrity of the aircraft. Usually the plane breaks up and you die in twisted metal or when it hits the ground. You know it is happening and ain't crap you can do about it. It is the lack of control that scares people spitless about dying in an airplane crash. Or, you die from the smoke as they have to land the plane to get out of it. 37000 to 0 with a landing on land is hard to do. Over water, almost impossible.

 

[herkulease]

Originally posted by: NakaNaka
Right now they are saying no carry on luggage, nothing that you can't put in a clear plastic bag like travel documents and a wallet. Is this forever? I hope not. I can't imagine an international flight without laptops/mp3 player/etc.

its misinformation your getting.

It is NO liquids or gel like substances in your carry ons.

drinks, perfumes, shaving cream, sun tan lotion.

Baby milk will require that someone drink it before they pass through security at foreign airports.

You can still have carry ons.

Detailed New Rules