Posted on 06/08/2003 1:05:01 PM PDT by ml/nj
Something Special in the Air
I am sitting on American Airlines Flight 1844, to Chicago from Santa Ana, Calif., as I write this story, and I am trying to control my rage. A Screwdriver has helped take off the edge.
About 30 minutes ago, American Airlines agents took two empty S.T. Dupont X-tend lighters out of my checked-in bag, and said that they needed to be destroyed. They claimed they were "dangerous goods" that could endanger the lives of my fellow travelers -- apparently the equivalent of weapons of mass destruction in today's airline world.
I was actually at the gate waiting for the flight when my name was called over the loudspeaker. "Sir, they have found two cigarette lighters in your bag and they need to be destroyed," said a woman who was working the check-in desk, rather officiously.
"Those two lighters are worth about $300," I said. "You can't just destroy them."
"I suggest you go and speak to the American Airlines employee who checked you in, but I think that you might miss your flight," she said, not really bothered and obviously saying her comment in hopes that I would relent to losing my lighters.
She looked horrified when I hightailed it towards the check-in desk. It meant going through the security gauntlet again, which included taking off my belt, shoes, eyeglasses and IWC stainless steel watch -- thank God I left my flak jacket at home.
Ms. Karen Lawson, the American Airlines compliance officer at John Wayne Airport (what would the Duke do in this situation?) couldn't have been less helpful. It was as if she was speaking to bin Laden himself as she explained that such dangerous goods as my lighters should be immediately destroyed. But she would give me two hours to find someone to pick them up, if I wished. "I can't give you any more time," she said, "and I am doing you a favor giving you two hours."
I explained that my 95-year-old grandmother, whom I had been visiting in California, was not up to the task of retrieving my lighters from her wretched grasp. "Couldn't you just give me the lighters back?" I asked politely.
"I am unauthorized to do that, and I could be fined if I did so," she said. She looked very annoyed that I was still standing in front of her.
I changed my tactic. "I fly more than 60,000 miles a year with American Airlines and I only have two hours to find someone to get my lighters? Surely, you can help me somehow?"
She said, "That's all I can do for you."
There was no use continuing. I spun around and ran for the security check to make my way to Gate 8 for the flight to Chicago. But I was really upset. It wasn't the money lost. It was something more disturbing. I felt that American Airlines had taken something more from me. Those were my lighters, personal things that I valued. One of them had traveled around the world with me. They were like old friends.
I understood and welcomed the security measures in the airport, but it all seemed so arbitrary. I had checked in lighters (empty of butane) on American Airline flights from the Dominican Republic to Miami as well as Miami to Las Vegas with no problem, a fact I explained to Ms. Lawson. But she would have nothing to do with it. Perhaps she wanted the lighters herself?
In any case, I hope she -- or whoever else ended up with them -- enjoys my lighters. And I hope she enjoyed the opportunity of being some sort of mini-dictator. What she should have done is offered to mail the lighters to my office in New York. Or, she could have simply said that she was extremely sorry for the loss. But she didn't care, and attitude like that is why few will shed tears when another few thousand American Airlines employees are fired, or their company closes. But I wish her, and American, no bad will.
Maybe she didn't care because I was a smoker. I certainly didn't have any prejudice for her officious, unthinking demeanor.
We all know what it is like to be a cigar smoker in America, so we are used to being treated poorly. Don't check your lighter in your luggage. Don't smoke in public places. Don't buy Cuban cigars. Don't inflict secondhand smoke on others.
I just wish some people could say it all with a smile.
So because the government subsidizes the building of interstate highways, there should be no speed limits or passing lanes, everybody should be allowed to get drunk as a lord or high as a kite and drive on them, etc? Nonsense.
Yes, I'm willing to take a chance on everyone else’s lighter.
I'm not. And neither, apparently, is American Airlines. So there we are.
Freedom is becoming an illusion.
We've almost 300 million people in this country today. While there are still wide-open spaces, there are simply too many of us to allow the same laissez-faire attitude that we had at the beginning of our "third rate agricultural experiment." Things will continue to change, I'm afraid, and not necessarily for the better.
We are too open a society. It is our strength and weakness.
I too hate it that we are at war and don't have the same sense of freedom that we had pre-9/11. The worst part is that for every bin Ladin that we destroy, more will most certainly pop up. Greed, envy, and hatred cannot be destroyed by military action any more than I can eliminate all the crabgrass from my lawn by pulling one leaf at a time.
I am not willing to give that up in the name of security. I'm surprised by anyone who would.
At least you didn't trot out the same tired old Ben Franklin quote that everybody else uses when somebody doesn't pander to anarchy. For that I thank you.
I don't disagree one little bit. Conspicuous consumption is still ... consumption. Just don't expect me to shed any tears for him when he feels (as he apparently did) that the rules are only for the Little People and loses his playpretties as a result.
Which until recently said "if you have a lighter, you can't carry it on. You have to check it." Suddently, the rule turns into "Instead of checking your lighter, you have to carry it. That is, unless our employee just feels like confiscating it that day."
Then I'll ask you the same question I asked earlier in the thread, said question to which I still have failed to receive an answer. If petty theft is indeed American's company policy as seems to be the charge of many here, then why weren't my silver and gold cufflinks/watch/ring/pendant, etc. taken from me during my recent trip?
What's company policy is not the theft, but applying rules in such a capricious manner that an employee can use them to steal -or merely to annoy, as they love so much - at his/her discretion. Obviously, your chain and pendant carried into the cabin is more of an actual threat to the flight than an empty lighter in checked baggage. So why the arbitrary difference in treatment of these items?
Funny - I've been flying to various holes in the world since the late 70s and have NEVER had the presence of a disposable lighter or even an old Zippo that I used to carry questioned at any time. I carried them on my person, in my checked baggage, and in my carry-on bag, and have never had a problem. Heck, I hit the trifecta on my recent trip and had two in my carry-on bag, one in my pocket, and one in my checked bag. Nary a word was said to me. Go figure.
That is, unless our employee just feels like confiscating it that day."
If you want to play hyperbole, then go ahead and do so. I'm tired of the game myself.
A false comparison. An airline openly posting and enforcing its rules does not equal jackbooted thugs kicking down my door and confiscating my firearms. Don't like the rules? Then don't fly.
As for the issue of the airlines receiving money from the government, haven't you heard of that "Crazy Larry" guy on the radio with his commercials? Why, he claims that the government will give you money for working on your invention, taking dance lessons, etc. Guess that means that I need to get that bar code tattoed on my forehead because I received $3.76 in a government check for my gerbil ranch in Montana ... ;)
And I think you're missing my point - the author essentially accused the airline droid of arbitrarily and capriciously confiscating his lighter. I say nay, that the droid was only following the publicly stated policies of his/her employer, said policies being available for the author's perusal as well.
It might be interesting to follow the paperwork trail and demand that the airline show where and how the lighters were destroyed, if indeed they were. If the author could do this and show that the droid was lying to him and pocketed the lighter him/herself, then I think he has a valid point. Otherwise, as they say on Perry Mason, "The burden of proof is on the accuser."
** yawn **
Do go on.
A couple of lighters are not potential explosives.
What about a couple hundred? Or 10,000? So the author is some sort of special personage who has some soi-disant Constitutional right to violate the airline's posted rules? What about all the other poor schmucks on the plane - maybe some are lighter manufacturers. As I've taken great pains to explain in previous posts, laissez-faire is NOT the rule of the day when it comes to the safety of over 200 total strangers on an airliner.
And they were empty.
Again, irrelevant. The airline made no distinction between empty and full lighters in their written policy.
And they could have been mailed to the passenger if the stupid functionaries were not focused on our obedience rather than actual flight safety.
(broken record mode)
Then don't fly.
(broken record mode /OFF)
Are you really claiming that perhaps an ounce of butane is more dangerous than, oh say the vodka in the couple of dozen little bottles in the galley or the fuel in the tanks or for that matter the methane in the intestines of the passengers?
If the airlines required me to stand on my head and cluck like a chicken before boarding one of their aircraft, I'd stop flying anywhere tomorrow. You, and the author of the piece, have that same right.
(broken record mode)
Then don't fly.
(broken record mode /OFF)
I believe you when you claim to be unable to recall when this nation had a sane government and a free society. All that has been put down the memory hole and you have mastered the skill of double think.
I've mastered the skill of not wanting my aircraft to catch on fire from a couple thousand leaking butane lighters, a brick of Black Cat firecrackers, or "empty" oxygen canisters in the cargo hold (much like the "empty" ones that brought down that airliner in Florida a few years ago).
Double plus good, comrade!
Niiiice ... an Orwell reference AND calling me a commie as well. At least you blend your personal attacks in an entertaining way.
Well, I leave you and the others the field today. I'll take my Soma and eat my gubmint cheese now and catch another thread. See ya.
It should come as no surprise to you that I like your demonstrated ability to reason.
ML/NJ
LOL! This is reassuring!
(Do the towelheads smoke?)
ML/NJ
So because the government subsidizes the building of interstate highways, there should be no speed limits or passing lanes, everybody should be allowed to get drunk as a lord or high as a kite and drive on them, etc? Nonsense.
You really need to think before you type.
The argument was that the acceptor of funds loses some right to set his own standards. In this case American loses some right.
The argument about speed limits (which I diasgree with BTW) is that the Federal government CAN tell the States what speed limits to set, and what age to set as the minimum for alcohol consumption. That is, because the the States accept government highway funds the States must give up some of their Constutitional rights to control these things. You say "Nonsense," I assume meaning that the States should give up some rights. Why isn't American in the same position?
ML/NJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.