Paris CDG airport
Nov 24th, 2007, 07:56 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paris CDG airport
While departing from CDG airport a few months ago, i noticed that passengers were not allowed to take any liquid (even if transparent like water bottle).Reason security.Fine,,good.
However, it said that passengers can buy liquids in the restaurants or kisoks after the security check and can take them into the aircrafts.
So this implies that CDG airport acts as an agent to those restaurants by forcing the passengers to buy water and such other liquids!! I don't understand when a transparent water bottle (even half consumed)by a passenger is a security risk,how can not be the water bottle sold by oneof the kisoks not be a security risk?
Seems a good way to promote business, isn't it?
Any comments?
Nov 24th, 2007, 08:05 AM
#2
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really understand your reasoning - have you been out of touch for a while. This is nothing new. Since the plot to use explosives hidden in drink bottles was foiled in London a year and a half ago you can't take any liquids (subject to the 3 oz. rule), even bottled water, past security at any airport, not just CDG. You can purchase all the water you want once you are inside security.
Nov 24th, 2007, 08:20 AM
#3
OK citybell - you don't fly often, right? You can't take liquids through airport security just about <u>anywhere</u> -- not just CDG.
One is limited to 3 oz or smaller containers. So if you were flying out of CDG, or LHR or LAX or JFK, you could not take a bottle of water through security. If you want water, you have to buy it after security.
This has been the rule for well over a year.
One is limited to 3 oz or smaller containers. So if you were flying out of CDG, or LHR or LAX or JFK, you could not take a bottle of water through security. If you want water, you have to buy it after security.
This has been the rule for well over a year.
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:07 AM
#4
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That doesn't answer the question of why liquids would be a security risk, and the answer to that is: They <i>aren't</i> a security risk. The restrictions are just part of the useless "security" rules that are gradually eroding civil liberties everywhere.
Nov 25th, 2007, 07:33 AM
#5
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point is the in the plot againt BA that was thawarted last year the terroists concealed a liquid explosive in drink bottles which is what led to the ban on all liquids (subject to the 3 oz. rule). So it was either ban all liquids or delay passengers for untold hours while the security personnel physically inspect every bottle of water and/or liquid than someone tries to carry past the security checkpoint. Obviously water in an of itself is not a security risk but other colorless liquids could be dangerous.
This subject was debated ad nauseum when the rules were first introduced and there's no need to discuss it again. Search the archives and you'll find 100's upon 100's of comments.
This subject was debated ad nauseum when the rules were first introduced and there's no need to discuss it again. Search the archives and you'll find 100's upon 100's of comments.
