Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk
Reload this Page >

Lighters to Be Banned on Airline Flights

Other Talk "Otterville" plus Religion and Politics

Lighters to Be Banned on Airline Flights

Old 03-01-05, 08:05 AM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 13,491
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Lighters to Be Banned on Airline Flights

Link to Article:
Yahoo!

News - Lighters to be banned on airline flights
WASHINGTON - Airline passengers will have to ditch their lighters or lose them to airport security screeners when a new ban on lighters takes effect in April.


The ban reflects Congress' fear that lighters could be used to ignite bombs on planes or otherwise damage or destroy them. The Transportation Security Administration until now had banned all types of lighters, except for butane, which were limited to two per passenger.

TSA's new ruling extends the ban to all butane lighters, effective April 14.

Proponents of the ban, including Sen. Byron Dorgan (news, bio, voting record), D-N.D., cited the case of convicted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, who tried but failed to light explosives in his shoes with matches. Had Reid been using a lighter, he might have brought down the plane, Dorgan said. Reid was sentenced to life in prison in 2003.

The new ban is expected to streamline security procedures, because in the past screeners had to distinguish between butane lighters and types that were banned.

The Department of Transportation bans lighters in checked baggage, so passengers wanting to keep them have few options aside from returning to their cars to stow lighters or handing them off to non-fliers.

The U.S. Postal Service considers lighters to be hazardous material and will not mail them.

Passengers can continue to carry up to four books of matches, but that, too, is under reconsideration, said TSA spokeswoman Amy Von Walter.
Well, it is a step in the right direction... and long overdue. I could never understand why lighters were allowed on the plane when smoking isn't.

People didn't believe me when I said that lighters were still allowed.

It really steamed my clams that security would administer colonoscopies to boarding passengers, and yet allow people to carry "mini-explosives" on the plane.
Old 03-01-05, 08:11 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You know the TSA is just plain useless. They'll ban lighters but allow up to 4 books of matches? If you can't smoke on the plane...who the hell needs matches? Why are they even considering this?
Old 03-01-05, 08:29 AM
  #3  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Chrisedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Part of the Left-Wing Conspiracy
Posts: 6,947
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
You might not be able to smoke, but you can still bring cigarettes on a plane. Completely lame, and totally unnessasary. You can't check them, you can't carry them on, and you can't mail them. The TSA is in bed with Bic..."I feel safer"
Old 03-01-05, 08:40 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 13,491
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
I just heard that this ban was a result of the "shoe bomber" attempt. Some of the details about it is that the guy tried to light explosives in his shoe with matches and that if he had a lighter, he would've been successful.

so the question is... why on earth has airport security been forcing people to take their shoes off when the key factor in the guy's failure was the lack of a lighter?! At the very least, they should've been banning lighters since 9/11.
Old 03-01-05, 08:47 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,503
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 18 Posts
Don't see the need for it.
Old 03-01-05, 08:49 AM
  #6  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How they going to detect them, I went on a plane recently with a lighter and it didn't set off the metal detector.
Old 03-01-05, 09:06 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 17,204
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Holy hyperlink Batman!
Old 03-01-05, 09:38 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,947
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
It's nice to see that they took swift and decisive action after Richard Reid attempted to blow up that airplane this past December. Oh wait, that happened over three years ago.
Old 03-01-05, 09:45 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,016
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pdutta2000
You know the TSA is just plain useless. They'll ban lighters but allow up to 4 books of matches? If you can't smoke on the plane...who the hell needs matches? Why are they even considering this?
People can still smoke in designated areas in airports. Flying is stressful enough, but I doubt smokers want to forego smoking all day when flying through several connections.
Old 03-01-05, 09:55 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Hero
 
jfoobar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 38,102
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Other than attempting to piss off smokers, I cannot imagine any real purpose for this rule. Banning matches and lighters will be even worse.

On the other hand, I see a business opportunity here. I'll stand in the concourse and sell lighters to deplaning passengers for $5. Especially at a hub airport I should make tons of money.
Old 03-01-05, 09:59 AM
  #11  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 11,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just another reason I will no longer fly. The security measures are nonsensical and stupid, and don't add any real security.

How about banning Semtex and TATP from the plane instead of lighters? I mean, the worry here is not that he got on board with matches, but with plastic explosive packed into his shoe. Duh. How about bomb sniffing devices scattered throughout the airport? How about a bomb sniffer at the gates? Don't these make just a tad more sense than hassling every smoker everywhere?

Last edited by Otto; 03-01-05 at 10:04 AM.
Old 03-01-05, 10:10 AM
  #12  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Otto
How about banning Semtex and TATP from the plane instead of lighters? I mean, the worry here is not that he got on board with matches, but with plastic explosive packed into his shoe. Duh. How about bomb sniffing devices scattered throughout the airport? How about a bomb sniffer at the gates? Don't these make just a tad more sense than hassling every smoker everywhere?
While I agree with this, I always love when new and inventive ways pop up to annoy smokers.
Old 03-01-05, 10:18 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Duran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 8,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm so happy we federalized airport security! If lighters are that dangerous, why does it take 3 years to ban them?
Old 03-01-05, 10:18 AM
  #14  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 11,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Green Jello
While I agree with this, I always love when new and inventive ways pop up to annoy smokers.
Yeah, I hear what you're saying. I always enjoy new and inventive ways to beat the hell out of jackass militant non-smokers. "With a baseball bat" is my current favorite, although "with a golf club" has it's points.
Old 03-01-05, 10:27 AM
  #15  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Otto
Yeah, I hear what you're saying. I always enjoy new and inventive ways to beat the hell out of jackass militant non-smokers. "With a baseball bat" is my current favorite, although "with a golf club" has it's points.
There's nothing "militant" about my views at all. I have never once in my life said anything to a smoker about it. But every time smoking is banned in a new city or taxes are raised on cigarettes it makes me smile a little wider. Thanks for helping my distain of you people move along though.
Old 03-01-05, 10:30 AM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Work. Or commuting. Certainly not at home.
Posts: 17,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Green Jello
There's nothing "militant" about my views at all. I have never once in my life said anything to a smoker about it. But every time smoking is banned in a new city or taxes are raised on cigarettes it makes me smile a little wider. Thanks for helping my distain of you people move along though.
It's this type of crap that makes me want to start smoking again. Just to piss people like you off.

As for this ban, I really fail to see how this will make me any safer in the air. But hey, it feels good and it sounds good, right?
Old 03-01-05, 10:32 AM
  #17  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WildcatLH
It's this type of crap that makes me want to start smoking again. Just to piss people like you off.
Go ahead and kill yourself and waste all your money if you like. It won't piss me off at all. I'll just continue to vote for every measure to ban and raise taxes on it with a big smile on my face.
Old 03-01-05, 10:45 AM
  #18  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 11,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Green Jello
There's nothing "militant" about my views at all.
Well, look who's all defensive.

For the record, I didn't say your views were militant. You just assumed I was talking about you and your views. I was very careful not to address what you said directly.

You might consider why it is that you feel the need to prevent people from doing things that you don't like but they do. I think it's some kind of deep seated psychological issue, but I am not a professional in that area, which is why I recommend seeking professional help for your issues.
Old 03-01-05, 10:46 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Breakfast with Girls
People can still smoke in designated areas in airports. Flying is stressful enough, but I doubt smokers want to forego smoking all day when flying through several connections.
All they have to do is offer matches at the designated smoker areas. When you go there...you get matches. When you get on a plane...you get the matches taken away. I don't want to take away a smoker's right to smoke...I want to take away the possibility of some terrorist, or some little kid, lighting my damn seat on fire.
Old 03-01-05, 10:49 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 13,491
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Otto
The security measures are nonsensical and stupid, and don't add any real security.
I never agree with you on anything, but on this issue, I agree wholeheartedly!

Originally Posted by Otto
How about banning Semtex and TATP from the plane instead of lighters? I mean, the worry here is not that he got on board with matches, but with plastic explosive packed into his shoe. Duh. How about bomb sniffing devices scattered throughout the airport? How about a bomb sniffer at the gates? Don't these make just a tad more sense than hassling every smoker everywhere?
Sorry, but considering all of the things that are currently banned on planes, it only makes sense that lighters be on that list.

Having said that, a common sense approach to security is long overdue.
Old 03-01-05, 10:53 AM
  #21  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 11,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pdutta2000
I want to take away the possibility of some terrorist, or some little kid, lighting my damn seat on fire.
Oh good fucking grief...

Has this EVER happened to you? Even once? I mean, I've been flying around this world for the last 10 years or so, and lighters and matches have been allowed onboard all that time, and I've never seen a seat get set aflame in mid-flight.

Look, there's enough REAL concerns to be thinking about instead of having to invent entirely new ones. Let's deal with the real problems first before dealing with the imaginary ones.
Old 03-01-05, 10:53 AM
  #22  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Otto
You might consider why it is that you feel the need to prevent people from doing things that you don't like but they do.
It has nothing to do with the fact that I want to deprive pleasure from smokers. It basically stems from 3 reasons.

1) I hate the smell. I can't stand to sit in a bar or restaurant and sit anywhere near a person who is smoking. Sure you are getting pleasure from it, but you are annoying other people with your vice.

2) Generally speaking (I have no idea about you Otto), smokers are complete pigs. Most of them seem to think the world is their ashtray. They throw their buts on the ground and out of their car windows whenever and where ever they want. It makes the world a more ugly place and out west where I live, it causes millions of dollars in fire damage ever single Summer.

3) I am a person who greatly respects logical thinking. So naturally anyone who chooses to do something that sucks a ton of their money and slowly kills themselves will get little respect from me.
Old 03-01-05, 10:56 AM
  #23  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 11,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by sracer
Sorry, but considering all of the things that are currently banned on planes, it only makes sense that lighters be on that list.
This is a bit silly, don't you think? Shouldn't we ban a thing because of there being an actual threat instead of it simply fitting with everything else? I mean, nail clippers are still banned too, while sharpened sticks of wood (aka pencils) are allowed without question. Oh no!

Originally Posted by sracer
Having said that, a common sense approach to security is long overdue.
Exactly. Half the banned crap doesn't need to be banned. Security is now totally paranoid and utterly ineffective because of it. They're so busy looking for these sort of non-existent threats that it'd be fairly easy to sneak real threats right on through. A common sense approach is to sit everybody the hell down and actually consider what the realistic threats are, and then to address them. Banning new shit because we're scared is just pointless and stupid.
Old 03-01-05, 10:56 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 40,214
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by sracer
so the question is... why on earth has airport security been forcing people to take their shoes off when the key factor in the guy's failure was the lack of a lighter?! At the very least, they should've been banning lighters since 9/11.
Yeah. Banning lighters makes a whole lot more sense than banning bombs.

Richard Ried couldn't get his bomb lit. Some are saying that he couldn't get it lit because matches are harder to use than lighters. I say that's bunk. A childproof lighter can give you just as much trouble as a match (sometimes more).

And really, if Joe Terrorist manages to sneak a shoe bomb through security, is he going to have that hard a time lighting it? Hell, they'll probably still keep selling lighters at all the Hudson News kiosks inside security. Pick one up there, get on the plane, and you're good to go.

This rule sucks. It's pointless, it inconveniences law-abiding Americans, and it doesn't increase our safety one bit.
Old 03-01-05, 10:57 AM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Otto
Oh good fucking grief...

Has this EVER happened to you? Even once? I mean, I've been flying around this world for the last 10 years or so, and lighters and matches have been allowed onboard all that time, and I've never seen a seat get set aflame in mid-flight.

Look, there's enough REAL concerns to be thinking about instead of having to invent entirely new ones. Let's deal with the real problems first before dealing with the imaginary ones.
Touche...let me ask you...before 9/11 have you ever seen a jet flown directly into a building? There is a new world out there...how's this scenario? I just bought 3 liters of vodka from the duty free shop and I get on a plane with a matchbook. Now i throw the vodka all over the place and light it. Then I throw more vodka and matches. Not realistic? Couldn't happen? Everyone thought 9/11 couldn't happen either. BTW...your answer is to first let someone burn a plane down before dealing with it?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.