TSA Declares Peanut Butter Is A Liquid!

Status
Not open for further replies.
army judge

army judge

Super Moderator
Jurisdiction
US Federal Law



The Transportation Security Administration's set of rules for safe travel in the skies have evolved over the years, as threats foreign and domestic make themselves known. Still, those rules sometimes result in a bit of confusion, and by one man's account, a lot of nuttiness.

On March 15, Twitter user @catholicpat, whose real name is Patrick Neve, recounts that on a recent trip through the airport, his stop in the TSA line left him scratching his head.

"I tried to take peanut butter through airport security. TSA: Sorry, no liquids, gels, or aerosols," wrote Neve, in a tweet that has garnered 10.5 million views and over a thousand comments. "Me: I want you to tell me which of those things you think peanut butter is."

Neve's tweet ignited a flurry of responses on social media ranging from confusion to incredulity, with folks far and wide sharing their own experiences in airport security.

"Aaannnnnd now you're on a list," joked one user on Twitter.

"I once brought a full, sealed jar of Nutella with me as part of my lunch on the airplane. They took it from me and threw it away," wrote another user, adding a crying emoji.

"This has happened to me too before," said another user on Twitter. "Meanwhile, in Italy, my husband has taken an entire lasagna as handluggage."

Still, some took the side of the TSA, citing that peanut butter does, in fact, fit into one of those categories.

"Peanut butter is a gel," said one user, before adding, "I kind of want to know what *you* think it is lol."

"Out of those 3, gel. But it's more of a paste," said another. "It's not really butter either."

The TSA caught wind of Neve's viral tweet and responded to all the hubbub surrounding it, taking to their often comically-toned Instagram and Twitter to add to the conversation.


snapshot_www.today.com_1679681194377.png


"You may not be nuts about it, but TSA considers your PB a liquid," wrote the official TSA account on Instagram. "In carry-on, it needs to be 3.4oz or less. Make sure all your travel-sized liquids fit in one quart-sized bag. #PeanutButter"

The reason for TSA rules

We reached out to the TSA for clarification and a spokesperson says that any item you can spread are included under this restriction. Any attempts to carry on more than 3.4 ounces of jelly, tahini or even hummus on the plane will be done at your own risk.

"Peanut Butter is considered to be a "spreadable," so it falls under the rule associated with Liquids, Gels and Aerosols," R. Carter Langston, press secretary for the TSA, tells TODAY.com in an email. "As such, its quantity is limited to 3.4 ounces in carry-on bags. As we frequently seek to remind travelers: If you can spill it, spray it, spread it, pump it or pour it — then it's subject to the 3.4-ounce limitation."

Although the TSA website titles the page on its website "Liquids Rule," the policy associated with liquids, gels and aerosols was established in 2006, following a terror plot that involved plans to take a homemade mixture of chemicals via sports drinks bottles onto at least 10 U.S. and Canada-bound flights from London.

The TSA says peanut butter is a liquid and the internet has thoughts
.........
 
Peanut oil can be processed to create glycerol. Which can then be nitrated to produce nitroglycerin.

Peanut paste or peanut butter also has a very energetic reaction to potassium chloride, the mix could theoretically be used as rocket fuel.
 
yeah I had them take some face scrub for me one time, it was less than an ounce over the limit.

LOL, they don't play around.
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
The TSA needs to be dissolved.
Click to expand...

I think we ought to try improving the weak points in TSAs system and ensuring it has a reasonable budget to carry out what Congress tasked it to do before talking about getting rid of it. If we dissolved TSA, what would be your solution to screening passengers boarding planes? If you advocate for dissolving it then you ought to have an answer to that too or your solution is incomplete.
 
The TSA is scientifically correct: peanut butter is a liquid, although it certainly has a higher viscosity than a number of other liquids like water. In physics, all matter falls into one of three states: a solid, a liquid, or a gas. Peanut butter clearly is not a solid nor a gas. While we don't often think about which of the three states of matter the things we use fall into, when you start applying the scientific defintions of matter I think you'd be surprised to find a lot of things fall into the liquid category, even though in the common use the term we wouldn't immediately see it as a liquid.
 
Tax Counsel said:
In physics, all matter falls into one of three states: a solid, a liquid, or a gas.
Click to expand...


Science marches forward...
We've known about solids, liquids and gases for hundreds of years, but scientists have discovered other states. One state is plasma, which naturally occurs in lightning, and we create it in fluorescent light bulbs and plasma TVs. Another state of matter is Bose-Einstein condensate, but this state only occurs with super-low temperatures.

Solids, liquids and gases
 
Tax Counsel said:
I think we ought to try improving the weak points in TSAs system and ensuring it has a reasonable budget to carry out what Congress tasked it to do before talking about getting rid of it. If we dissolved TSA, what would be your solution to screening passengers boarding planes? If you advocate for dissolving it then you ought to have an answer to that too or your solution is incomplete.
Click to expand...

Go back to the system that worked for about 30 years. The TSA and the rules it creates are virtually always reactionary. They act like the 9/11 terrorists would have been stopped by the current TSA. There is no reason to think they would have been.

A novel 9/11-type attack isn't going to be stopped by the TSA. It will be stopped by the intel community just as 9/11 should have been.
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
Go back to the system that worked for about 30 years. The TSA and the rules it creates are virtually always reactionary. They act like the 9/11 terrorists would have been stopped by the current TSA. There is no reason to think they would have been.

A novel 9/11-type attack isn't going to be stopped by the TSA. It will be stopped by the intel community just as 9/11 should have been.
Click to expand...

So true, mate.

Allow me to add, TSA can't stop the crazies and jack balls from attempting to open emergency exit doors in flight, or from using a spoon to inflict bodily harm on the flight crew and/or other passengers. TSA fails to protect innocent, sleeping passengers from the many sexual assaults in flight, especially those long haul midnight flights.

The more governmental bodies do, the more they destroy!!!
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
Go back to the system that worked for about 30 years.
Click to expand...

That old system won't work all that. All it did was screen for metals — guns and knives. And that's why the 9/11 attack worked, because it didn't screen for the material the terrorists brought on board. We are in a different world today than 20 years ago. The terrorists, drug smugglers, etc., have all gotten more sophisticated in what they do. We'd still have to screen for the same things we do now. The biggest problem most people have with TSA is the time it takes to get through the line. That won't change unless airports and the government devote more resources to provide more check points that people can use. Chucking TSA and hiring new workers won't solve that problem if all you do is hire the same number of people that TSA uses now. And you'll have to create a new organization for it, spend money for training and equipment, etc. Congress, airports, and airlines haven't been willing to put up the money it will take to do the job right, whatever name you give to the organization that does it.
 
army judge said:
So true, mate.

Allow me to add, TSA can't stop the crazies and jack balls from attempting to open emergency exit doors in flight, or from using a spoon to inflict bodily harm on the flight crew and/or other passengers. TSA fails to protect innocent, sleeping passengers from the many sexual assaults in flight, especially those long haul midnight flights.
Click to expand...

That's because there are no TSA agents or other law enforcement aboard most flights. If you want someone to take care of the above problems (other than the airline crew), we'll need to come up with the money to pay for it.

We have to make choices about how much safety we want and what we are willing to pay for. I too like smaller government, to the extent feasible. But if you reject spending the money to protect airline passengers and another plane blows up, don't be one of the people blaming the government for it when it happens because you supported NOT having the government involved. You can't have it both ways.
 
Tax Counsel said:
All it did was screen for metals — guns and knives. And that's why the 9/11 attack worked, because it didn't screen for the material the terrorists brought on board.
Click to expand...

The 9/11 hijackers brought box cutters on to the planes and used them to threaten and attack passengers and crew.

Prior to 9/11 I routinely flew with a pocket knife in my pocket. When the contents of my pockets went through security, the knife was checked to make sure the blade was less than 4" (it was) and I was allowed on the plane with it.

Box cutters (aka utility knives) have shorter blades that are razor sharp and probably more deadly than the average boy scout pocket knife.

If all knives and blades had been prohibited back then, and confiscated, it's possible that the hijackers, without weapons or with less effective weapons, could have been subdued.

As annoying as the security precautions might be, it's not TSA that's the issue. No matter what organization is doing the security check, what counts is what a flyer can and cannot bring on to a plane.

To that extent I agree with the carry on limitations.

If someone wants to take a prohibited (for carry on) or limited item, put it in checked baggage and quit your belly aching.
 
Tax Counsel said:
That's because there are no TSA agents or other law enforcement aboard most flights. If you want someone to take care of the above problems (other than the airline crew), we'll need to come up with the money to pay for it.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, are the alleged AUTHORITY FIGURES lying about these people?


Law Enforcement | Transportation Security Administration

TSA hiring Federal Air Marshals nationwide: Recruitment taking place in the New York/New Jersey region on Monday and Tuesday | Transportation Security Administration


badge-of-fam.jpg

amtrak.jpg
 
There are many people that seem to think that the TSA is the reason we haven't had another 9/11. That simply isn't the case. The office of the inspector general states the TSA misses between 70% and 95% of test guns run through the system.

The reason we won't have another 9/11 is because of 9/11. People before 9/11 thought that during a hijacking you just sat there and sooner or later you would be released safely. That assumption didn't even make it past 9/11 and flight UA 94.

The TSA is security theater and absolutely nothing more.
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
The TSA is security theater and absolutely nothing more.
Click to expand...

After being rushed through certain airports and patted down in others for forgetting to take a belt off I can attest to this. The TSA are so stricken with PC fear that the hijackers could get through today just like they did in 2001.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top