Can't wear shoes through security, right?
 

Well, since I think we've exhausted cassandra's thread about MP3 under 10K feet, I'll start another thread about stupid rule - or in this case, a non-rule - in air travel these days.

Well, it's about taking one's shoes off at airport security checkpoints. Now, I don't believe there's any written law/directive/rule that says one must take off his/her "footwear". I certainly haven't seen any signs at the airport, and I have not read any written rule.

Instead, passengers are "advised" and "encouraged" by TSA officers to take off their shoes or boots at the checkpoint. So, what the heck is that? Can one disobey? And if one refuses to take off their shoes, then what? Full body searches afterwards (which I assume will mean taking off the shoes anyways).

Well, this past weekend, I for the first time decided to wear sandals (Teva sport sandals) on the plane instead of shoes/boots, and I had no problem with TSA officers in Houston IAH or Boise, ID (BOI) going through security with my sandals on. The TSA officer did "recommend" the guy in front of me at BOI to take off his shoes.

And, BTW, what was the threat about shoes to start with? I can't remember if this "non-rule" started after 9/11, or the shoe-bomber. But don't you think one can put as much explosives to do some harm in the soles of sandals as in shoes?

Another consideration is safety of passengers in emergencies. Hey, I know from now on I will <b>always</b> wear sandals to get on a plane instead of shoes. But with various crashes we know they are not as safe. [For example, Air France in Toronto, Singapore in Taipei.] In fact, Singapore Airlines changed the footwear of their &quot;Singapore Girls&quot; from flip-flops after their Taipei crash to give them more protection. But these days, I see lots of people flying in sandals and flip-flops. No wonder...

I was told once shoes that contain metal must be removed. Shoes that have no metal (sandals, flip flops, etc) do not have to be removed. That includes shoes that have nails, etc. that you can't see. Again, what does that have to do with shoe bombing??

I don't remember ever needing to remove my shoes until after the shoe bomber, actually. One flight, I had to remove them going through security then again right before getting on the plane (checked by the airline's gate attendants). What a pain...

I'm considering slippers for my next flight with real shoes in my carry on. I really hate walking barefoot or in my socks across that dirty carpet.

My understanding also is that you aren't required to, but if you don't remove them when 'suggested' or 'strongly recommended', you will get put through the more stringent security check.

Sandals don't guarantee anything. I have been a trip where going through one airport I was not asked to remove my sandals. On the return flight I also kept them on through security. This time, however, 'Step over here, miss'... and then I was required to remove those same sandals. The TSA agent sent them through the machine (while I sat on a chair keeping my feet off the ground). Then, the TSA agent wanded the bottom of my bare feet.

Even though there are actual rules and regulations about what the TSA can or cannot do, there apparently is a lot of individual interpretation of those rules by the agents themselves.

'there apparently is a lot of individual interpretation of those rules by the agents themselves.&gt; Amen!

I was told that if the shoes have heels over 1 inch then they should be removed.

However, I've also been asked to remove sneakers at certain airports (SMF) when the same shoes at others (LAX) are allowed through.

We flew 4 flights on UA mid-August (Boston, Denver, Jackson Hole). Went thru security at each airport, even stop-over in Denver because of long lay-over. 4 adults, one 15 year old. Frequent traveler husband automatically took off his shoes at security. None of the rest of us did. About 1/2 people in line took of their shoes. I was wearing sandals, 15 year old was wearing sneakers as was other adult.

We were not asked to remove our shoes. Nor did we see any other shoed passenger be asked to remove their shoes.

And FYI - we also found out from Jackson Hole police department and local TSA personnel that there is no law requiring passengers to show ID. It is up to airlines to determine to their satisfaction that passenger is who is printed on ticket - but there is no law (we discovered this when son lost his ID)

gail - At basically every US airport I've gone through security recently, the person who checks ID is at the entrance to &quot;the line&quot;, and these are hired by the airline(s) and are not TSA officials. Only the actual screeners are TSA, and they don't need to see one's ID.

That's also how airlines can set up priority lines for its &quot;elite&quot; and first/business passengers. They run the lines and can send whoever to whichever line at the actual checkpoints. TSA simply clears whoever come to the checkpoints.

GoAway -
Did they find anything inside your bare feet? :))

As far as ID - we were told when one checks in at counter with airline (not TSA) that there is no law requiring an ID be shown - but every airline requires it.

<b>gail</b>,

you were told wtong. It's not a requirement to have an ID to fly. It certainly makes it easier on evertybody, but by not having an ID will not preclude you from flying.

;-) so should I make sure I have my shoes in the off position under 10,000 feet?

I wear slip-ons with socks/kneehighs in the winter and barefoot in the summer -- easy to get them on and off, but I'm never completely happy about padding along the conveyor belt in stocking/bare feet. They are not, btw, backless but either a form of loafer or maryjane with straps on them -- certainly more secure than those terribly loose flipflops and mules that everyone's wearing.

Yes, that new rule arose after the shoe bomber, and although it's not as nutty as the 10K foot electronic device rule -- I can imagine packing all kinds of stuff in wedge heels or those stacked, &quot;airfilled&quot; cross-trainers -- it's still a bit picayune compared to all the other possibilities for sneaking things through.

Perhaps there's some aspect of profiling involving dirty feet or bad pedicures we don't know about?

But it makes &quot;other&quot; people feel that flying is safer. Like all of those babies that are not allowed to fly because they share the same name as a suspected terrorist. Yes, our government hard at work.

I was eyeballing that xray thing at the airport the other day. I think if I position my arms just right I could go right through.

Yesterday morning at BOS I told the TSA person that my shoes were okay - having just finished around 20 flights in the past month or two overseas where shoe carnivals are unknown - and never having set off the beeper - and was told, &quot;Fine, then we'll put you through supplemental security.&quot;

IMO that is an abuse of power and worthy of sending off an angry note to TSA over. Either it's a rule or it's not, but it shouldn't be grounds for blackmail at a busy airport in the morning. BTW, SEA and BOS are notorious shoe carnival sites. They don't require it at other places with arguably more to be worried about, like JFK or LHR or TLV.

Gardyloo, are you really serious? If TSA can rely on our assertions that our shoes are OK, why not just ask us if we have any proscribed items and skip the actual screening?

TSA is, understandably, pretty quiet about what their policies and procedures are. If they become common knowledge, any potential hijacker would then know how to circumvent them.

My understanding is that the great shoe debate started after the shoe-bomber was caught. Before it started, however, I had been advised by TSA personnel to remove any shoes that have metal in them (some have a substantial shank in the sole) to avoid setting off the alarm and requiring a wanding. After the shoe bomber, however, rumor is that TSA decided they wanted to scan any shoes with thick soles, and I hear frequent references to a one-inch rule. But were I a TSA manager, I'm not confident that my people could accurately eye-ball one inch, and I don't think I would want them measuring heels, thus revealing the parameters they are using, so I would be inclined to have my people err on the side of caution, which probably means everyone would remove their shoes (I think it would cause a lot more disgruntlement if some passengers had to remove their shoes, while some didn't).

But my experience is that the shoe-removal policy is sometimes and someplaces not fully enforced, and I would attribute that to the vagaries of any human endeavor; people are not machines, and we make mistakes.

One rule that I am certain is consistently enforced is that if the TSA screener asks you to remove your shoes and you refuse, you will be subjected to a heightened personal screening, even if you don't set off the monitor; and if you complain and ask to speak to a supervisor, you will receive a form you can use to file a complaint, after you have been subjected to the heightened personal screening at the behest of the supervisor.

Lets be realistic. TSA has no plane to catch; you do, so they are holding all the aces.

Incidentally, I would be perfectly happy to see TSA shut down. 9/11 was a catastrophe because terrorist were able to comandeer planes and use them to murder thousands of people. However, now we are aware of that possibility, and the cockpits are secure (not as secure as they should be, certainly), so the most a terrorist could do would be to blow up a plane, killing at most a few hundred. I would be willing to take that chance, if we were freed from the massive delays and inconveniences attendant to TSA screening.

TSA and Homeland Security are both kneejerk reactions to 9/11. They serve no purpose other than adding another level of federal bureaucracy. No hard to see during Katrina.

BTW, I don't think anybody will object to everybody taking off their shoes, or even just the rule that &quot;if TSA tells you to take off shoes, you take off your shoes, no questions asked&quot;. I can live with both.

But these &quot;advice&quot;, &quot;recommendation&quot;, &quot;suggestion&quot; and &quot;encouragement&quot; of taking off shoes are just ridiculous.

Clevelandbrown, the fact was that several people in front of me went through with shoes on and got no hassles. My complaint is that the agent made it plain that I would be given the SSSS treatment simply for disagreeing with her &quot;suggestion.&quot;

A rule is a rule; make it consistent or make it go away. Using threats of harrassment (and I don't doubt that once the system has you pegged as uncooperative you'll get the 4S treatment every time hence) is lousy policy and undermines the respect the public is likely to give this important service. In MHO.

Gardyloo, for someone who admittedly doesn't know exactly what the rule is, you seem strangely confident that it was not enforced. Perhaps the people in front of you were employees or crew members, and the rule may differ for them; perhaps the rule is that every fifth person will have to remove their shoes; perhaps the rule is that people of a certain age have to remove their shoes. We simply don't know, and I hate getting caught in line behind some sea-lawyer who decides to debate the issue with the screener. I'm not implying that you are old or a sea-lawyer, I'm just saying that without knowing what the rules are, you have little reason to conclude that they have been broken.

As to a &quot;suggestion&quot; that you remove your shoes being a request, perhaps you are unfamiliar with the concept of courtesy. That a screener suggests you remove your shoes, or move to a certain counter, rarely means do it if you feel like it. I was raised to be polite. and when I went into the service I told one of my sergeants to do this, please. He didn't recognize that as an order, apparently, and didn't comply until we went through an adjustment. Personally, I would rather have the scanner be polite, than bark at me to take your damn shoes off.

clevelandbrown -

No, there simply isn't any real well-explained rule about this. That's why there are all these confusion. It has nothing to do with courtesy.

For example, every US airport I've gone through recently has signs that say laptops and videocams must be taken out of their case/bags and placed on the plastic trays to x-ray. There's no ambiguity there. No &quot;suggestion&quot;, &quot;advice&quot;, &quot;recommendation&quot; or &quot;encouragement&quot; that one take out their laptops or videocams. So, why not the same for shoes?

They can easily say - all footwear off, or all footwear with more than one inch of sole off, or all footwear off unless TSA can see your toes, or whatever. Just give us something. Written on a board. Bring out a ruler to measure the sole. I don't mind, I don't care. I need clearly written rules so that passengers can understand.

Is it that complicated? If they can do it with laptops and videocams, why not footwear?

My understanding of the shoe &quot;rule&quot; is that it is not a rule, but a procedural decision that can be taken by each TSA station chief, circumstantially. If you have a reference to a published rule, we'd all benefit from seeing it, Clevelandbrown.

No, they weren't crew nor wearing badges nor sky marshals. They were wearing, variously, tennies, flats, loafers, and sandals. I was wearing my standard Clarks slip-on boat shoes, in which I've flown 56,500 miles in the past 5 months. I have been de-shod in Boston, Seattle, and that's it - not LAX, JFK, ORD, PHL, YVR, LHR, and around a dozen more airports from Turkey to Zimbabwe.

I don't mind taking off my shoes, any more than I mind them swabbing my computer again and again and... (also a US thing, not other countries BTW).

Courtesy, you say? I agree. I was waiting for the P and TY words from the TSA vopos at BOS (I always get them at SEA) but I must have been there on a courtesy-free day.

Those of you that pass through PHL will appreaciate this.

I was returning from FRA on USA 893 and connecting to PVD. A TSA individual insisted that I take my shoes off. I told him that I was 100% certain that there was no metal in them. Not paying any further attention to him, I proceded right through the metal scan. Naturally I knew that I would not trigger an alarm. I then turned around, looked at him,picked up my belongings and proceded on.

You want politesse in response to trying to talk your way out of doing something a security officer requested? Wow. I'd love to see you deal with some Highway Patrol officers I've met.

Haxter-I know you're proud of your little act of sedition, but consider in the future whether you really want to be arrested at the airport, and then have to pay for a lawyer, and go through a trial for disobeying a screening at an airport screening checkpoint-you're very lucky you weren't arrested-and very foolish to do what you did.

And no, sorry, there's no &quot;naturally&quot; knowing anything-like I said, consider in the future how much it's worth to you-the next time, I assure you, you might not be so lucky.

Arrested for what???

<b>http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/editorial/editorial_1050.xml</b>

clearly states that you are not required to remove shoes.

<b>TSA Shoe Screening Policy

You are not required to remove your shoes before you enter the walk-through metal detector.

HOWEVER, TSA screeners may encourage you to remove them before entering the metal detector as many types of footwear will require additional screening even if the metal detector DOES NOT alarm.
</b>

Having another &quot;power&quot; trip Spygirl?

I understand and appreciate your responses however I work as a security officer for a firm that is involved with precious metals and from my experience the airport scanners are nowhere as sensitive as the ones that I go through each day with the same shoes on. On the occasion I mentioned I just had to deal with the overbearing idiodic attitude of the mental midget whom I encountered

Okay, let's get a few things straight here about the shoes issue, as well as the photo ID requirement-these two security policies seem to provoke anger in certain pax, sometimes justifiably, but most of the time not, and, as usual with aviation security matters, very few really understand the issues involved; either through being uninformed as to what accurate information there is out there, or simply because a segment of the traveling public just like to bitch incessantly about security procedures, simply to have something to bitch about, without caring what type of security value such policies provide to the traveling public.


First, the policy concerning the removal of shoes at the screening checkpoint:

Richard Reid, the so-called &quot;shoe bomber&quot; had shoes filled with highly unstable and very powerful plastic explosives, which, at the time-Dec. 2001- said explosives were, by and large, not able to be detected at the screening checkpoints. Accordingly, Reid had live, loaded bombs inside the soles of his shoes when he boarded AAL Flt. 63 on 12/22/01 at CDG inbound for MIA.

As many may know, Reid attempted to light his shoes in an effort to blow up AAL Flt. 63-the F/A's heroically prevented him from lighting the fuse in his shoes, other pax helped to secure him, and hold him down, tying him up with spare seat belts, and a French Dr. administered sedative injections-(this last bit was largely unsuccessful)-Reid is some 6 feet 4 or 5 inches, btw.

Interestingly-and I bring this up because it gives the lie to those people who firmly believe that 9/11 could never happen again, since pax would rise up to prevent a hijacker takeover-there was a man sitting next to Richard Reid, who did absolutely nothing-watched him attempt to light his shoes, and made no attempt to prevent it, or say anything-he was frozen with fear. This could be the case on ANY flight of the future-a plane with only a few pax, a given group of passive pax who would rather die at the hands of a hijacker than take affirmative action and help disrupt a terrorist act in the making. Food for thought, this.

TSA did not really get up and running until the end of 2002. At that time, almost a year after the Reid incident-there was a lot going on concerning the use of shoe bombs-(Richard Reid also had an accomplice, and he was prepared to use HIS shoe bombs, but had remorseful second thoughts and decided not to go through with it-the accomplice was recently sentenced in Great Britain to a term of 15 yrs., as he cooperated with authorities).

Quite justifiably, the USG determined that the American traveling public was at grave risk for shoe bombs on airlines, and given that the technology to detect explosives on the person was not yet in use, a decision was made to check all shoes. Now, two years later, that rule has been somewhat relaxed at a number of airports across the country.

Why? More sophisticated technology, with advanced explosive detection capabilities, better intell. concerning explosives that are carried on the person, more persons who might do harm to aviation ending up on no-fly lists, among many factors.

One should be aware that TSA security procedures are NOT uniform at each airport-I've said this a number of times before on this board. An attempt is being made to harmonize certain security procedures, however, as I have also pointed out before, there is an added security benefit in not having uniform security procedures at airports-(think 9/11-the hijackers knew what to expect in terms of what weapons could pass through the screening checkpoints without being confiscated) -that is not the case now.

So, the upshot is, there WILL be different security procedures in effect at some airports-and you WILL NOT know what they are until you show up to be screened. A very prudent security policy, this.

As for showing of IDs at airport check-in-whoever said that it is not required is incorrect. It IS required, by the USG. The TSA website provides pax with all access requirements here:

http://www.tsa.gov/public/interapp/e...orial_1044.xml


The photo ID requirement is a policy required by TSA which is implemented by the regulated entities, i.e., commercial air carriers (to be extended to GA (general aviation) as well).

To read about an unsuccessful lawsuit against the USG concerning the use of IDs at airport check-in, see the following case: Gilmore v. Gonzales, a discussion of which you will find on the plaintiff Gilmore's own website:

www.papersplease.org/gilmore/news.html

Appeals of his unsuccessful lawsuit to drop the requirement to show ID prior to boarding domestic flights is pending.

Don't you love this? Thanks AAFF for finding the quote. Now, let me try to figure out what this means:

- You don't need to take off your shoes.
- Even if the alarm doesn't go off, additional screening may be required.

So,

- Is this &quot;additional screening&quot; done when the shoes are on my feet?
- Am I required to lift up my leg?
- If not, does that mean the TSA agent will kneel/crawl to inspect my shoes?
- If the shoes are still on the ground, how is this &quot;screening done&quot;?
- If I resist lifting my foot, what is the TSA agent allowed to do?

I LOVE THIS!!! :)

To be honest with you I really don't know what that means.

I will tell you this. Few years back I did take my shoes off because it was either mandatory or at least it seemed that way (don't remember), but for at least 2 years now, I always refuse and not once did I get whatever the &quot;secondary&quot; check is. I politely explain to the TSA flunkie that it's not a requirement. Most of the time there is no second request, but on occasion I will get the &quot;powerplay&quot; TSA idiot that threatens me with all different consequences. I went as high as the station supervisor and eventually was allowed to walk right through when I calmly reasoned and informed them of my right not to play the &quot;shoe game&quot;, with the higher ups.
I know, many of you will say that I probably wasted more time then if I did remove the shoes, and it's true and it's also true that I inconvenienced some folks behind me, but to me it's all about the principle.
As somebody stated above, make it mandatory and I will abide, but a TSA flunkie deciding what and what I can't do does not work for me.

The worst &quot;shoe fetish&quot;
LAX
SEA
LGA

Somewhere in between
ORD
JFK

No &quot;shoe fetish&quot;
TPA
THE WORLD!

I really don't care whether it's policy, the law, a regulation or an individual request by an individual TSA, I take them off every time I fly.

It's not worth the time and energy spent arguing about it on this site. let alone the time &amp; energy &amp; inconvenience to others at the airport.

Worry about something more substantive, for example, if it was known that Katrina could bring devastation to the area and they were broadcasting a mandatory evacuation, why didn't they provide a method for evacuating those without cars or unable to drive? And volunteer/donate to Hurricane Relief. And work on making sure that these things don't happen again.

Sunshine, being Curmudgeonly

Spygirl claims wrt Haxter, &quot;you're very lucky you weren't arrested-and very foolish to do what you did.&quot;
For the life of me I cannot see where Haxter committed any &quot;act of sedition&quot; or &quot;disobeyed a screening.&quot;
Haxter said, &quot;A TSA individual insisted that I take my shoes off. I told him that I was 100% certain that there was no metal in them. Not paying any further attention to him, I proceded right through the metal scan. ... I then turned around, looked at him,picked up my belongings and proceded on.&quot;
It sounds like the TSA person did not say anything, even when provided the opportunity (when Haxter turned around looking for further guidance apparently). If there was any disobeying, it was obviously with the concurrence of the TSAer who did not follow up with any action. There was no disobeying here and even if it had gone further he would not have been arrested for gosh sake.
BTW, sedition? Not doing what a TSAer asks is sedition??? Now THAT's funny!.

Just reread last night's post. Boy, I must have been in a bad mood. Sorry I stepped over from being curmudgeonly to cranky!

AAFF,

&quot;You are not required to remove your shoes before you enter the walk-through metal detector.&quot;

Does this allow for the screeners to require deshodding after you pass thru?

When I was secondary-screened for not removing my sandals before going through the scanner, I was required to remove them so that they could put them through the x-ray machine themselves.

This was at a small airport (maybe 8 gates total?), and I had arrived in plenty of time. I knew when I refused to remove my sandals that I would probably be ss'd, and I also knew that I had given myself enough time to waste on it. If the TSA person wants more work to do, I'm willing to give it to them.

And no, they didn't find anything in my bare feet!

So who cares? Take your shoes off and get a move on. What extra energy does that take? Don`t tie up the lines. I couldn`t care less whether I have to take my shoes off, or not. Jeez!

In July I went thru security at Bradley at LAX, no problem with shoes.



Two hours later I had to go thru security twice at SFO. The first time no shoe problem but had to take them off at the second :^o



;

I think the whole shoe thing depends on the airport workers.

At Sacramento, I watched lots people ahead of me not remove shoes. One of the workers suggested I remove my shoes--I should have listened. My husband and I both got taken aside to be checked. The man told be to sit down in a chair. The female yelled at me because I did sit down in the chair without her permission. I thought they were going to totally strip my husband when they were checking him. Seemed it was a power thing with those two.

Haven't ever had such an experience with such unpleasant workers except at Sacramento. I think those two workers were just trying to make life miserable for people.

Now, we avoid Sacramento as much as possible.

I keep imagining airline travel in the future with some sort of mandatory TSA approved uniform that looks like surgical scrubs with paper underwear and flip flops for footwear.

I wonder if many of the checkpoint agents suggest removing shoes for their own sake as much as for safety concerns. Day in and day out they see the kind of shoes that set off the alarm and would likely prefer not to have to pat down so many people if they don't have to...maybe?

I stood behind a guy who refused to take his shoes off at the security person's suggestion because &quot;they're just gym shoes&quot;. The security guy just shrugged. I told the man thick heels can give a false reading. He didn't take them off, they did set off the alarm then he was pissed about getting patted down.

I always wear flip flops to security then change into my &quot;real&quot; shoes on the plane if I'm going to a less than warm destination.