DAA staff raffle! Overheard in Dublin airport

AlbertFoth

While eating macdonalds in Dublin Airport yesterday, (sun 12th Sept), I overheard 6 airport security staff discussing a raffle of passengers confiscated items taking place that day!

Apparently items which supposedly are a security threat, Beers, whiskey vodka, wine, champagne and who knows what else is raffled to raise money for charity! Admirable you may say!

If they are safe enough for staff to take home and drink then obviously they are not a threat at all!

Is it a money generating scam to make us spend more in the DAA shops?

Also, passing through the airport security recently i noticed the staff taking bottles of alleged "combustible" water from passengers. These possible combustibles were tossed into a wheelie bin!!!!!!! Hardly a safe way to deposit and safely contain these said possible threats.

I wonder what the protocols really are in disposing of these "dangerous" expensive drinks etc. I would like to know as this is a mockery of us travellers if this is true and i would like to know whats going on.

Its disgusting and not only that, how much precious water is needlesly thrown away.

pclancy

Great first rant post on boards AlbertFoth. I understand your frustrations but its just a fact of life now really. I'm often amazed at how I'm allowed on a plane with many potential weapons or means of killing people but my coke bottle is deemed far more dangerous then my lighter.

Anways, I'd rather general overhead gossip wasnt posted about something like this, are you sure they were going to take home the goods themselves and it had been confiscated for safety reasons? Can you be sure they were not just talking about a raffle of stuff for charity? I'm playing devils advocate obviously.

AlbertFoth

Hello pclancy

sorry if it sounded like a rant! I just find it amazing how security in the airport is shown to us to be so serious then behind the scenes this is going on. Kind of makes fools out of people.

I wonder if the higher authorities would be happy knowing this practice takes place.

From what i was listening to from these security guys they were pretty disgusted themselves.

I thought those opportune days had gone but this seems to be at a higher level.

Anyway its not really about that, its proof that the taking of liquids is a waste of time and an unnecessary procedure.

pclancy

Some people believe the threat of liquids being made into explosives on board an aircraft is great enough to warrant them taking large amounts of those liquids and banned stuff away from you. Its up to you to know what you can bring and what you cant.

What they do with that stuff afterwards is not fair I agree. But I guess if its to go anywhere then charity would be decent benefactor...

xflyer

Everyone knows that these items don't represent a threat. But they have no choice but to confiscate because those are the rules. The DAA give many to charity or have a raffle as was overheard. Many airports bin the lot which is far more wasteful.

What amazes me though is that people still get caught with them in their hand luggage. It may be a stupid rule but you can't avoid it.

andy_g

This has been going on a long time but being honest its a good system i heard about it while working for a company now gone from dublin. But think of it this way if the stuff was judt dumped then no money would be raised for charity and there has been some good charities involved just to name a few.

Beaumont hospital foundation, make a wish foundation, cancer research ireland. Thats only a few though the list is large.

funkyjebus

should they just throw out all that stuff, who would that help. we all now know what we can or cant bring onto a plane so if you get anything confiscated, it your own fault, that and the terrorists!

i think its a great idea to raise funds for charity, if that is in fact what you heard.

i dont see the point of your rant. is it about the charity raffle or the regs which have now been in place for a few years????!!

ShaneIRL

Who is the 'raffle' open to?

Is it just DAA staff or can the general public buy in too. If it is the latter then fair play to the DAA for thinking outside the box but if its simply internal I do beleive that there is cause for a conflict of interest when they confiscate items from people.

globemaster1986

ShaneIRL wrote: »

Who is the 'raffle' open to?

Is it just DAA staff or can the general public buy in too. If it is the latter then fair play to the DAA for thinking outside the box but if its simply internal I do beleive that there is cause for a conflict of interest when they confiscate items from people.

I understand your concerns about a conflict of interest but there is no grey area. Something is either allowed or it isn't. If its not it's the person's own fault for bringing it in the first place!

i think the raffle is a great idea!

AlbertFoth

I,m not really sure it's about the raffle for me, rather the fact that items which obviously are of no threat, are confiscated as they may be a threat and then sold off to staff. I wonder if they are insured against illness! What if some wierdo does try to smuggle something dangerous through the airport and that gets put up for raffle!

I also do think its a conflict in interest as there has not been any transparency from the airport that i can find, it does not say 'do not bring expensive bottles of plonk or we will raffle them to staff' anywhere I can see.

globemaster1986

AlbertFoth wrote: »

I,m not really sure it's about the raffle for me, rather the fact that items which obviously are of no threat, are confiscated as they may be a threat and then sold off to staff. I wonder if they are insured against illness! What if some wierdo does try to smuggle something dangerous through the airport and that gets put up for raffle!

I also do think its a conflict in interest as there has not been any transparency from the airport that i can find, it does not say 'do not bring expensive bottles of plonk or we will raffle them to staff' anywhere I can see.

It clearly says no liquids over 50ml (i thinks its 50mls anyway) on those signs all over the place!

AlbertFoth

Its 100Mls that you are allowed I think but thats not the issue. The issue of transparency from a state owned company is the issue.

I agree people should know not to bring liquids over 100ml after all this time.

On the other hand, if its such a security risk why are these items not treated as so. Also I think people should be told that their confiscated goods will be raffled to staff instead of telling how their items are prohibited and will be disposed of. Thats a lie really!

Dacian

I think the OP may be mistaken in what he overheard. The security checks confiscate liquids from passengers. Who goes thru security with a bottle of champagne or whiskey in their bag? (Am sure a few non aware people do this)

I think perhaps that the raffle may refer to all the items of lost property that the DAA collect this the year. Just think of the amount of stuff (duty free shopping) people leave under their seats while waiting to board an aircraft. If no-one claims these items then the DAA has to dispose of them.

Why not sell raffle tickets to staff with the money raised going to charity? Easy and quick to get rid of then. If they opened the raffle up to the public they would still have to keep the stuff until the winner turned up at the airport.

Alpha Papa

Alcohol that is confiscated at security checkpoints likes of whiskey,champagne etc.. that is surrendered at this point the passenger can have it disposed of or donate to charity for fundraising purposes. Its the passengers choice.

Please remember the regulations are in since 2006. Passengers can return to check in and check in the item at there cost, return it a friends/family member seeing them off or post it to themselves if applicable (not also suitable due to size)

The process of the surrendered drink being donated by the DAA to its staff charity of the year is well known and well reported in the media. The DAA has its own charity commitee and all items that donated are recorded for transparency purposes before being handed over to the charity.

The alcohol or other surrendered items helps charities around Ireland raise much needed funds through raffle prizes or hampers etc..

Last year DAA staff and passenger contributions raised 140k for Irish Autism.

internal raffles are only made up of prizes donated from the charity itself for the sole purpose of running a event to raise funds for the charity. Nothing wrong with this in my opinion.


http://www.dublinairport.com/at-airport/airport-security/EU_Liquids_Regulations.html

AlbertFoth

Sorry Alpha Papa but your link to DAA does not state anywhere that confiscated goods are donated to charity!

I can understand lost property being used for making money for charity and a great idea and cause it is. With that i totally agree.

As for confiscated supposed threat/ prohibited items you are wrong! I don't think for one minute that the DAA would show to the media that they condone raffling off these supposed possibly dangerous items to staff!

Thats ridiculous! Sounds like you know a bit about the DAA and maybe trying to dumb down this thread!

Also to the poster who said I must have heard wrong, I can assure you I heard exactly what I have posted, it was quite a heated discussion with raised voices and I found it very interesting hence my post.

Fact is this raises a few questions on the legitimacy of security protocol in Dublin Airport. I wonder how the press people in the DAA would respond to this subject????? A few collars would be ruffled i think!

Terrontress

I took a connecting flight through Prestwick once and of course had my duty free confiscated. I insisted on seeing the drink poured out. The security staff member was not happy. I told him that he thinks I am a potential terrorist, I think he is a potential alocholic thief so I had to see it destroyed. He looked like an alco as well!

Alpha Papa

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/travel/2010/0814/1224276778982.html

IN TRANSIT: A PASSENGER travelling from Dublin to Sligo to visit her sister who had recently given birth was stopped by security and made to hand over a small hamper from the upmarket cosmetic retailer L’Occitane.
The hamper was a beautifully wrapped and expensive present. Because the flight was internal and the passenger had no baggage to check in, it never dawned on her that the same regulations on liquids would apply to this short domestic flight as apply on long-haul flights. But they do. Dismayed, she waved goodbye to the present and asked security staff what would happen to it. They’d no idea.
The answer to the question depends on what airport in what part of the world you get caught in. Your precious nail file or fun bottle of Grey Goose vodka could end up raising funds for charity, being flogged on eBay or heading straight for a dumpster.
The Dublin Airport Authority manages its collection of confiscated items with efficiency. It has two categories which it won’t let on planes: prohibited items (axes, machetes, shotguns, Swiss Army knives and nail clippers); and surrendered items, which include all liquids in containers of more than 100ml.
The DAA says it has collected some 40,000 surrendered items since restrictions on what liquids passengers can bring on planes were introduced in November 2006. “The vast majority of the public now know what items are prohibited. People have got used to it since 2006 and we are not confiscating nearly as much as we would have even two years ago,” said a DAA spokeswoman. She said that most items which end up being held at the security points are things passengers have simply forgotten are in their luggage.
All the liquids perceived to have a value, including unopened bottles of wine and spirits, cosmetics and perfumes – half-used bottles of shampoo are dumped daily – are collected by the authority and donated eight times a year to a designated charity. The charity then make up hampers from the items which they sell to raise funds. This year’s charity is Beaumount Hospital Foundation.
WE ALSO CONTACTED the British Airport Authority to find out what happens to items left at security desks in UK airports. A spokesman said passengers can check-in the offending items but, if they don’t or can’t, then the items (collected weekly by a waste management company) are recycled or destroyed.
We had the spokesman treble-check, as we couldn’t believe that perfectly good bottles of whiskey, unopened tubes of cosmetics and Swiss Army Knifes just get thrown away. He confirmed that UK airports dump the stuff.
Tightened security started after the 9/11 attacks in the US and it is in the US where, arguably, the most evolved method of dealing with confiscated goods has been developed. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has collected over 10 million items a year at security checkpoints since 2001.
Shampoo and other liquids in containers larger than 100ml are usually immediately disposed of through private waste contractors but items which are deemed to have some value are donated to state surplus agencies.
Rather than dumping it or giving it to charity, these agencies flog it for profit. State agencies and youth organisations, such as the Boy Scouts of America, are given first stab at the pile of unclaimed knives and can buy them at discounted prices. The surplus agencies have found that the best avenue for selling penknives, nail clippers and the like is online auction houses like eBay. The products sell for around 50 per cent less than the average retail price.
Some of the deals are remarkable. You can get a deer-hunting kit – including a gut-slitting knife, a multi-tool, outsized large safety pins, rope and torch – for $50 (€39).
According to the agencies, hundreds of pairs of handcuffs and assorted bondage paraphernalia also make it into their warehouses each year. This is doubly unfortunate for the unlucky passengers who’ve had them confiscated – not only do they have to contend with losing the stuff and the public embarrassment when the case is opened, it probably spoils their weekends away too.

I hope this puts an end to you acting like a troll, you every think maybe some people wont to do some good and raise money for people in need. Im not trying to dumb down anyt thread. The above proves the DAA have alway been transparent about this. So go troll somewer else!

AlbertFoth

Your only interested in hearing yourself and not listening or trying to understand what this thread is trying to say, I think your a debunker of some sorts.

The point is why are they giving unopened consumables of which the origins of are totally unknown, to charity!

There are bootleg cheap copies of vodkas and whiskies out there that have nearly killed people. Thats only one scenario. The whole security thing is a sham to some extent but you wont want to hear that as your obviously from the DAA damage control press office.

How do you explain the staff working alongside wheelie bins full of 'combustible' bottles of water every day? Does that show care for staff and passengers knowing that these are not held in a secure container.

I,m not trolling i,m simply passing on something I think is an issue and certainly the security staff had a problem with it and they know more than you unless as I say your a DAA mole!

Thanks for your useless links you made your point.

Alpha Papa

If your really are concerned contact the DAA or contact the charities that benefit from it and lodge a complaint.

Im not DAA PR haha far from it! DAA mole thats the best name ive been called so far on boards There must be secret armies of us monitoring these sites at all times of day and night! haha get real..

You say DAA dont publish it in the media.. I provide a recent link to rebuke this and you ignore it! haha now who's not listening!

Security isnt a shame its actually a very serious matter. If you have a concern on this matter again, contact the DAA on this and im sure they'd be happy to answer your questions.

I provided a link earlier which covers the EU regulations on liquids. A requirment on each member state to enforce this through guidance from the Department of Transport to Irish Airports etc.. Its not a scam to defraud you and make you buy duty free! It all comes from the EU/EC. Its actually to provide peace of mind to passengers untill new advancements in x ray comes online to detect explosive liquids etc..

I still think your a troll trying to just bring a bad name to the DAA. but hey its free country so you can do what you want horse! I just dont like people only hearing a one sided affair that's why i posted not for any other reason i.e not a mole!

nag

Quite frankly, I agree with AlbertFoth. If something has been confiscated because it's a perceived security threat, then it should be disposed of as if it were a security threat.

Personally, if I had something of value confiscated and I was given the choice to have it destroyed or given to charity, then of course I'd give it to charity. However, I've never heard of anyone ever being given that option nor was I aware that this is what happens to confiscated goods of value.
I was also under the impression that once you had gone through the metal detector, you wouldn't be allowed back out to the check-in desks with your goods but maybe I'm wrong on that one?

As AlbertFoth already alluded to, let's say a terrorist goes through security with a liquid bomb disguised as an unopened bottle of whatever. It then gets confiscated and then given to charity, what then?! A hypothetical situation but not an impossible one and I highly doubt that all those containers (if any) get checked before being given away.

Alpha Papa

Be assured anything that goes on in a airport is safety assessed and conforms with H&S and security requirements. Again contact DAA if you really concerned.

without getting into disscussion on security situation in a airport on public forum.

AlbertFoth

I dont think it would be of any use contacting Dublin Airport as if they ARE doing wrong here they are simply going to get some media savvy PR person to talk me or anyone into believing they are perfectly correct in what they are doing.

I think i will do some research into who controls the DAA security and ask them what they think about this issue. That will answer our differences once and for all.

I suppose the department of transport might be worth an email, but I,m sure there is another european agency which is above them, that's where i intend to make my enquiry.

Maybe alpha papa could help me here and find the links to the agencies and european regulators who control security for DAA!

Alpha Papa

google.ie

Enjoy trolling then!

AlbertFoth

Its quite odd alpha pap but i just been checking your previous posts. The reason I did was you made me curious as to how defensive you are of the DAA and lo and behold most of your posts are all DAA related.

It seems your either obsessed with DAA or you work for them. Not a healthy post history i must say. Anyway if you want to insult me by calling me a troll then thats fine but your wasting your time, post space and not contributing with any manners or decorum.

I thank you for some of your input but, to call me, before you have even researched things for yourself from higher sources other than the DAA is complete ignorance on your part. Its obvious to me your quite possibly ex or current airport police or maybe a member of the cleaning dept with a lost dream of becoming a 'JOEY' (airport police as you quoted in your past posts).

If you know so much about the airport then you should know which government dept I should start with, although i,m sure you dont want to aid the enemy you might get in trouble.

Alpha Papa

I am non of what you listed. I personally think my post history is fine and healty.

Its simple man if your unhappy with contacting the DAA about something that has to do with there airport then contact the Department of Transport and they contact them maybe. I dont have a link but google will as i provided.

AlbertFoth

Thanks for your advice, i'll try that!

nag

Alpha Papa wrote: »

Be assured anything that goes on in a airport is safety assessed and conforms with H&S and security requirements. Again contact DAA if you really concerned.

Oh wow, you've totally put my mind to rest. I forgot that nothing ever makes it past H&S and the people who enforce it are all robots who never make mistakes, especially in this country. I've totally been "assured".

Alpha Papa wrote: »

without getting into disscussion on security situation in a airport on public forum.

Aside from going OT, I don't know why you'd want to avoid discussing airport security on a public forum. Strange. More likely it is that you're not allowed discuss work related stuff in public.

andy_g

nag wrote: »

Aside from going OT, I don't know why you'd want to avoid discussing airport security on a public forum. Strange. More likely it is that you're not allowed discuss work related stuff in public.

Airport security is just that airport security and therfor should not be discussed at what goes on behind the scenes so everyone just calm down and get back to the topic at hand.

AlbertFoth

Hello Andy_G

I dont think nag was meaning to discuss airport security on this forum, Nag was simply pointing to the fact that alpha papa works for the DAA and he/she cant discuss work on these forums.

Anyway back to the topic.

urajoke

I have to say I completely agree with the DAA's policy on this.

If people are still STUPID enough to forget the basic rules of modern air transport then they deserve to have the stuff confiscated. It wasn't the DAA who made the rules regarding 100 ml liquids and sharp objects etc they just enforce them. It's probably the DAA's way of saying "Yes they are stupid rules, but we have no choice but to enforce them. This way some poor needy/sick/dying person can get some benefit from them". It's also nice to see good CHARITIES benefiting from this.

If you had stupidly forgot that you had a perfectly okay bottle of Champagne in your bag would you prefer to see it

a) Blown up in a controlled explosion at high cost
b) Poured down a drain
c) getting raffled off for charity

My answer is C.

While eating macdonalds in Dublin Airport yesterday, (sun 12th Sept), I overheard 6 airport security staff discussing a raffle of passengers confiscated items taking place that day!

Apparently items which supposedly are a security threat, Beers, whiskey vodka, wine, champagne and who knows what else is raffled to raise money for charity! Admirable you may say!

If they are safe enough for staff to take home and drink then obviously they are not a threat at all!

Is it a money generating scam to make us spend more in the DAA shops?

Also, passing through the airport security recently i noticed the staff taking bottles of alleged "combustible" water from passengers. These possible combustibles were tossed into a wheelie bin!!!!!!! Hardly a safe way to deposit and safely contain these said possible threats.

I wonder what the protocols really are in disposing of these "dangerous" expensive drinks etc. I would like to know as this is a mockery of us travellers if this is true and i would like to know whats going on.

Its disgusting and not only that, how much precious water is needlesly thrown away.

What you heard was only part of the story and part of the fact's.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/travel/2010/0814/1224276778982.html

All the liquids perceived to have a value, including unopened bottles of wine and spirits, cosmetics and perfumes – half-used bottles of shampoo are dumped daily – are collected by the authority and donated eight times a year to a designated charity. The charity then make up hampers from the items which they sell to raise funds. This year’s charity is Beaumount Hospital Foundation.

The Irish Times - Saturday, August 14, 2010

Yes barely three weeks ago this was investigated.

Obviously this was the Charity giving the people who confiscated this stuff the chance to buy/win some of it back. This way it also motivates the security staff to be vigilant for ALL of the contraband stuff being carried.

It's not like this is the DAA'S made up rules, they are the same the world over every airport HAS to enforce them. They are widely known, well publicized both in the airport and by the airline when you by your ticket. It just proves again that people don't read the T&C's before they click on them.

Is it a money generating scam to make us spend more in the DAA shops?

3-1-1 for carry-ons
As of 26 September 2006, the Transportation Security Administration adjusted the ban on liquids, aerosols and gels. Travellers are permitted to carry liquids through security checkpoints in containers of 3.4 ounces (100 mL) or less that fit comfortably in one quart-size clear plastic zip-top bag. This procedure came to be known as "3-1-1 for carry-ons" (3.4 ounce containers in a 1 quart bag, 1 bag per passenger). Items purchased in the airside zone after clearing security could be brought on board without restriction. Other exemptions to this restriction include medications and breast milk.[34]

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/prohibited/permitted-prohibited-items.shtm

Who are the TSA ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration

Rather than dumping it or giving it to charity, these agencies flog it for profit. State agencies and youth organisations, such as the Boy Scouts of America, are given first stab at the pile of unclaimed knives and can buy them at discounted prices. The surplus agencies have found that the best avenue for selling penknives, nail clippers and the like is online auction houses like eBay. The products sell for around 50 per cent less than the average retail price.

Some of the deals are remarkable. You can get a deer-hunting kit – including a gut-slitting knife, a multi-tool, outsized large safety pins, rope and torch – for $50 (€39).

Even in the USA they give the confiscated stuff to charity for them to make money from.

Well done to Alpha Papa for finding that very Informative article.

If you still have a problem with this issue I suggest you call these people in order.....

TSA (Their rules not the DAA's)

The Office of Civil Rights can be reached toll free at 1-877-EEO-4-TSA (1-877-336-4872) or (800) 877-8339 (TTY), or by E-mail at TSA-ContactCenter@dhs.gov.

Department of Transport
Telephone: Locall 1890 44 3311 or, + 353 1 670 7444 (from outside of Ireland).

DAA
Head Office, Dublin Airport, Co Dublin +353 1 814 1111

AlbertFoth

Items which cannot be consumed internally would not be an issue with me so much.

On the other hand i think it is a health and safety issue passing on consumable items without knowing its origins knowing someone is going to consume it! Especially knowing it was confiscated in a security area run by professionals who deem it to have a potential threat of some kind.

I agree certain things can safely be passed on to benefit charitable organizations.

Urajoke,I think your missing the point here and like alpha papa all your trying to do is stick up for the DAA for some reason.

Do you honestly think its good practice to pass on contraband consumables to third parties knowing it may not be bona fide.

Lapin

A few people have come on here and stated the bleeding obvious by informing us all that the rules have been in place since 2006.
We know the rules - thats not the issue here.

Not one person (apart from nag) has addressed the OP's initial query.
That is - why are liquids deemed too dangerous to be taken on board an aircraft, tossed into a nearby container where the potential damage could prove even more fatal? Liquids over 100ml are regarded as dangerous by virtue of the EU regulations. So by raffling off such items for charity (however admirable the intention may be) the DAA are, by definition, permitting the sale of potentially lethal substances to unsuspecting buyers.

Regardless of how harmless the items might be, if they are deemed unsafe to be carried on board an aircraft because of anti terrorist legislation, why is it assumed that they are safe for consumption on the ground ?

A fair question by the OP and one that deserves a more intellegent response.

pclancy

I dont see any health and safety issues in passing on sealed goods in as new condition.

I think the OP got plenty of intelligent responses...its obvious the laws are illogical in one sense and it seems stupid to then pass on said "dangerous" items to raffle winners but the point is thats the law and its there to catch the possiblity of some liquids being used to make dangersous concoctions of some type that "might" be used to make explosives. In order to prevent the use of some substances you have to ban them all.

Somebody from the DAA must have thought of this as well, especially from a legal point of view, I cant see them just taking whats been disposed of and passing it on-they leave themselves open to a huge can of worms by not checking what they actually contain. But if its sealed and factory freash I dont see an issue.

I think we all see it as being ironic but its just a fact of life now with air travel and until the percieved threat goes away its not going to change.

Terrontress

I agree with what is being said by Albert.

If my bringing 500ml of Ballygowan onto a plane is dangerous, why would they let me saunter off after confiscating it?

And if it is so critical to prevent it going through then why do they entrust all those mongoloids up at the airport to look for it?

testicle

pclancy wrote: »

I dont see any health and safety issues in passing on sealed goods in as new condition.

How do you knot it wasn't opened and resealed?

Dyr

I remember flying back form new york some tool trying to wander through security with a case full of spirits and the security trying to explain to him that he needed to go back to duty free with it to have it brought through for him, they nearly had to break out the finger puppets for this plank. If I was dealing with the likes of that I'd want a stiff drink and all.

AlbertFoth

pclancy wrote: »

I dont see any health and safety issues in passing on sealed goods in as new condition.

I dont think sealed goods are safe either even if they look like they are ' in as new condition'.

I'm quite sure a terrorist would make a bottle of whiskey full of combustable liquid look just like new, and even sealed. They can get hold of weapons and explosives so i,m sure getting a tool to seal a bottle they have tampered with would not be an issue.

My point still stands in my opinion, its a definite health and safety issue!

I wonder who would drink it if they found out it was confiscated from a person who fits the criteria of a terrorist or even just a plain nut job. Under that circumstance I certainly would not.

Ms. Chanandler Bong

AlbertFoth wrote: »

While eating macdonalds in Dublin Airport yesterday, (sun 12th Sept), I overheard 6 airport security staff discussing a raffle of passengers confiscated items taking place that day!

Apparently items which supposedly are a security threat, Beers, whiskey vodka, wine, champagne and who knows what else is raffled to raise money for charity! Admirable you may say!

If they are safe enough for staff to take home and drink then obviously they are not a threat at all!

Is it a money generating scam to make us spend more in the DAA shops?

Also, passing through the airport security recently i noticed the staff taking bottles of alleged "combustible" water from passengers. These possible combustibles were tossed into a wheelie bin!!!!!!! Hardly a safe way to deposit and safely contain these said possible threats.

I wonder what the protocols really are in disposing of these "dangerous" expensive drinks etc. I would like to know as this is a mockery of us travellers if this is true and i would like to know whats going on.

Its disgusting and not only that, how much precious water is needlesly thrown away.

Your water wasn't taken away because it's potentially dangerous. It was taken away because you were carrying more than the permitted amount of liquid in a container that isn't permitted. The container can only hold up to 100ml. Your bottle, at a minimum if you have the kids size;), is 250ml. Ergo you can't bring it on the plane.
http://www.dublinairport.com/at-airport/airport-security/EU_Liquids_Regulations_FAQs.html

I'm assuming the alcohol comes from duty-free bags that have been opened before returning on a day trip. See link below for regulations on buying duty-free on a day trip. It clearly states that you can do so only if the duty-free bag is still sealed & has the receipt inside.
http://www.dublinairport.com/at-airport/eu-regulations/

And before I'm accused, I do not work for the DAA. It's the policy of any company I've ever worked for to hold a raffle for items left behind by customers. Some small places just hand them out to any staff, no raffle required! These things are checked to make sure they are fit for use, (ie consumption in the case of alcohol!) before being handed out. If you're silly enough to ignore obvious signs for regulations on what you can carry then you deserve to lose your items!

AlbertFoth

Cateryn

Are you serious! They takes bottles over 100ml because they are just not allowed!!!!! Where does it say that on any of your links. Anyway your behind in the discussion and your post really does not contribute in anyway to this thread. Please read previous posts.

Also you are very wrong. Liquids over 100ml are taken because they are deemed to have the possibility to be of, or a part of a possible threat. not just because TPTB decided to say " lets throw away water and liquids over 100ml".

http://www.transport.ie/aviation/AviationServices/aviationsecurity/index.asp?lang=ENG&loc=2402

https://www.ecac-ceac.org/index.php

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/security/security_en.htm

Do some home work you might learn a thing or two.

Ms. Chanandler Bong

AlbertFoth wrote: »

I wonder who would drink it if they found out it was confiscated from a person who fits the criteria of a terrorist or even just a plain nut job. Under that circumstance I certainly would not.

If the criteria for 'terrorist' or 'nutjob' includes those that continue to attempt to bring liquids of more than 100ml onto a plane, then there are quite a few of them about! I'm sure the family of the person employed by the DAA are well aware that s/he gets things in raffles at work. If they don't want to drink/use it, that's their prerogative.

It seems to me that your original point was about your water being taken away from you & dumped in a bin before you even though it wasn't dangerous. That point was answered by quite a few posters a few times. Now, your point is that it's a H&S issue for the staff to be drinking any of the liquids they confiscate. If you're that worried about the health & safety of the DAA staff (& given your answers to another poster earlier, I don't think you like the DAA that much!), then ring them up & complain about the practice. Email them.

Ms. Chanandler Bong

AlbertFoth wrote: »

Cateryn

Are you serious! They takes bottles over 100ml because they are just not allowed!!!!! Where does it say that on any of your links. Anyway your behind in the discussion and your post really does not contribute in anyway to this thread. Please read previous posts.

Also you are very wrong. Liquids over 100ml are taken because they are deemed to have the possibility to be of, or a part of a possible threat. not just because TPTB decided to say " lets throw away water and liquids over 100ml".

http://www.transport.ie/aviation/AviationServices/aviationsecurity/index.asp?lang=ENG&loc=2402

https://www.ecac-ceac.org/index.php

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/security/security_en.htm

Do some home work you might learn a thing or two.

I did some homework, the links are in my first post above. See the answer to question 3 on the page.

What do you mean by liquid?
Some things are evidently liquid, like drinks and perfume. Others are less obvious, like gels, pastes, lotions, mixture of liquids and solids and the contents of aerosols. Some examples of these are toothpastes, hair gels, face creams, liquid cosmetics, lip-gloss, deodorants, perfumes and shaving foam.

Even bottles of water?
Yes, even water that is in a container over 100ml is not permitted through security.

No-one is saying specifically water or alcohol, liquids over 100ml aren't allowed. Simple fact, no getting around it.

Not wasting my time arguing with someone who can't grasp that basic piece of information...

AlbertFoth

Cateryn,
Am I not allowed to have a valid point! This is a discussion board and people agree with me too.

I certainly do not have a problem with the DAA i fly frequently through Dublin Airport and have found the experience fine so far!

I have been checking into this and will continue to do so unlike you! From what i can gather so far this practice may well be frowned upon by the agencies who control security issues for DAA security.

Once again i'm not attacking the DAA i'm simply saying that I think they are doing wrong in one particular dept so please stop trying to insinuate any different.

You seem NOT to have an open mind that can look at issues in an intelligent unbiased and factual way, you post links which provide nothing to the thread and seem to be deadset on protecting the DAA for some reason.

Its a state owned body and thus should be open to discussion and if needed, critisism by us tax payers.

Did you check my links Cateryn? These are the people that control security at Dublin Airport and they are totally not affiliated in any way. I,m pretty sure they would defo frown upon this practice as it makes a mockery of the whole thing.

As to your statement about my original post changing to a health and safety issue, whats the problem with that? This thread is moving forward and so are my opinions, thats whats great about discussions, you get to define your point even if it may change a bit.

If you spent more time looking into this rather than try to make me look bad we all might learn something.

Albert

AlbertFoth

catreyn wrote: »

I did some homework, the links are in my first post above. See the answer to question 3 on the page.

What do you mean by liquid?
Some things are evidently liquid, like drinks and perfume. Others are less obvious, like gels, pastes, lotions, mixture of liquids and solids and the contents of aerosols. Some examples of these are toothpastes, hair gels, face creams, liquid cosmetics, lip-gloss, deodorants, perfumes and shaving foam.

Even bottles of water?
Yes, even water that is in a container over 100ml is not permitted through security.

No-one is saying specifically water or alcohol, liquids over 100ml aren't allowed. Simple fact, no getting around it.

Not wasting my time arguing with someone who can't grasp that basic piece of information...

Once again your not reading into this thread in a productive manner. But as your copied and pasted part shows, yes there are more potential threats being given to staff than just water and alcohol, so thats even worse in my opinion

Whats your point????? You think I was only discussing water! We all know the rules that are under discussion. Thanks for you input but like I said in my last post your not contributing anything positive.

Dacian

catreyn wrote: »

Your water wasn't taken away because it's potentially dangerous. It was taken away because you were carrying more than the permitted amount of liquid in a container that isn't permitted. The container can only hold up to 100ml. Your bottle, at a minimum if you have the kids size;), is 250ml. Ergo you can't bring it on the plane.
http://www.dublinairport.com/at-airport/airport-security/EU_Liquids_Regulations_FAQs.html

Its this simple. The rules say no liquids over 100ml.

I have had bottles of water taken from me, no-one ever told me they were dangerous, combustible, corrosive, explosive or anything sinister. I was plainly told you cannot have more then 100ml liquid in any single container.

The reasoning behind this is that you could still 'smuggle' liquid/gel explosives through security and then mix them once airside. However it is estimated that a liquid/gel bomb of 100ml or less would have minimal impact on an aircraft, thus the 100ml limit on containers.

Now personally I think the rule is nonsensical considering that 'terrorists' could purchase 40% ABV spirits in 1 litre bottles after security. Or that by focusing on the (so far) failed attempts to use liquid explosives the security people may miss the next attempt.

The DAA has been clear on what it does with valuable confiscated items. There is no conspiracy here.



AlbertFoth, for thread productivity purposes can you please clarify;

Are you angry at the rules?
Are you angry at the DAA for enforcing the rules?
Angry at being told you had a potentially combustible substance?
Or angry that they are raffling off the valuable items?

urajoke

AlbertFoth wrote: »

Urajoke,I think your missing the point here and like alpha papa all your trying to do is stick up for the DAA for some reason.

I'm not missing the point at all. I'm merely saying I agree with their policy. It's called having an OPINION. I have accepted yours and just because someone disagrees with you doesn't automatically mean they work for the DAA.

AlbertFoth

Ok Dacian

In my original post I told of a conversation I could not help but listen to in the airport. These were security staff who seemed to have a real problem with the practice of raffling prohibited liquids.

I wanted to know what the protocols were for disposing of said items.

As the thread has progressed I have concluded that this may also be a health and safety issue.

I have had some positive replies from people who actually can see the bigger picture here that there is a potential for staff members to receive items that may well be dangerous. Simple maths point to it happening at some point.

I am not angry with DAA, their procedures or anything else about them for that matter. I do, though, have concerns about this raffling off of potentially dangerous goods. They ARE taken because of potential threat value and not just because they are too big. Lets make that clear!

I may have been slightly annoyed at some people here by the way they dont seem to want to look past their noses and keep posting DAA links that do not address my points.

So I apologise if I have come across as angry!

I just want to get a difinative answer and am currently trying to find an email address of someone relevant from one of the agencies who are involved in DAA security who will be able to answer if this practice is indeed bona fide.

Terrontress

It isn't simply DAA's fault but the whole system is ridiculous.

As I said before, I try to get past security with a dangerous liquid. I get caught and I'm allowed to walk on while the liquid is tossed in the bin. What if caught with a gun? Walk on?

Personally, I have forgotten about liquids in the past and not had them confiscated. Not even mentioned. So keep trying to go through until you get it in.

Thirdly, if 101ml is dangerous but 100ml is not then why not get my co-terrorist to bring a further 100ml of Ballygowan and another to do likewise.

Finally, Albert's point holds. If it is not safe to bring on to a plane, it is not safe for an unwitting DAA staff member to consume.

andy_g

I love the way people are mentioning liquid explosive in this thread anyone that knows explosives knows that there is no such thing as liquid explosive.
The only type that could be considered a liquid explosive is nitro glicerian and to be honest you dont want to hold that the slightest jerk it will go off in your hand.

Also if you wanted to do something to an A/C you dont even need any weapons or liquids to do damage. Thats all im going to say on the matter for the moment.

magneticimpulse

andy_g wrote: »

I love the way people are mentioning liquid explosive in this thread anyone that knows explosives knows that there is no such thing as liquid explosive.
The only type that could be considered a liquid explosive is nitro glicerian and to be honest you dont want to hold that the slightest jerk it will go off in your hand.

Also if you wanted to do something to an A/C you dont even need any weapons or liquids to do damage. Thats all im going to say on the matter for the moment.

No nail polish remover and hair bleach can be combined to make a very known explosive...and that was in fact the 2 liquids which were found to cause this ban on minimal liquids. I do think its a joke fire lighters can be brought on...the plane is full of fuel!!! Which can be easily put on fire.

Anyway, another reason they might want to do it, is to minimise drugs being brought into a country? I mean you can transport cocaine, just about any drug in liquid form.

Overall I think people are really stupid if they dont know 4 years later that you are not allowed to take liquids/paste/gel in your hand luggage above 100ml. Or the various other things. If it is taken off them, its their own fault for not reading any documentation before their flight. What is done afterwards is of no concern...it prob does end up in the bin anyway...but that was the silly persons fault in 1st place to carry it.

If they want to bring alcohol etc...just put it in a box and into checked in baggage. Its a standard rule thats not just in Ireland.

michaelflynn61

I think a bit of common sense needs to be used here.

One of the reasons why the 100mls ban came in was to prevent to opportunity for people to bring on potentially dangerous liquids on board. It was not saying that every liquid over 100mls was potentially dangerous but like I said to prevent the possibility of someone bringing potentially dangerous liquids on board.

For anyone to try to treat all confiscated liquids as dangerous is ludicrous. As for "combustible" water?? Don't get me started!! You can't bring on liquids over 100mls, no your water is not dangerous but its volume violates regulations so tough.

Like I said, lets use some common sense here. You don't have to agree with the regulations neither should you be extremist about them but you just have to follow them. Seemples.

Lapin

andy_g wrote: »

I love the way people are mentioning liquid explosive in this thread....

Who, When & where ?