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 "suggestion", "advice", "recommendation" or "encouragement" 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 "rule" 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 "naturally" 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



;

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.