

Cupcake Deemed 'Security Threat,' Confiscated By TSA - spahl
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/30062442/detail.html

======
makecheck
Confiscated items only make sense if security exercises the slightest care
over handling those items. If an object is potentially dangerous, a team of
people in bunny suits should be hauling it _away from the crowd of people at
the checkpoint_ as soon as possible in a strong protective container and the
person who brought it should be in handcuffs.

The reality of course is that this stuff is thrown in a pile and kept in the
middle of a much larger crowd of people than you'd ever see on an airplane.
Worse, all the "dangerous" objects are allowed to mingle. If these things are
_actually_ dangerous, then security agents are being criminally irresponsible
by exposing the threat to an unnecessarily-large group. And for that matter,
anything _actually_ dangerous should be viewed that way by other people,
wouldn't you say? (If an uncaged rabid rottweiler were in the middle of the
checkpoint, I guarantee you that people would be paying attention to _that_ ,
so why not any of these other "threats"?)

As far as I can tell, security is either _wasting its time_ by confiscating
non-threatening materials, or being _criminally negligent_ by not treating
threatening materials seriously. Either way, there is a problem. And of course
I think the overwhelmingly obvious solution is to let people keep their
toothpaste and cupcakes so we can get on with our lives.

------
ams6110
_I guess we were also amazed at what can pass through security in one airport,
but not in another_

I've had stuff pass at one airport and confiscated at another. I flew to a
meeting in California earlier this year, and my toiletries (packed in a clear
ziplock bag) went unchallenged on the flight out, but my toothpaste was
confiscated on the return flight.

