Flight Ban for refusing X-Ray

Wait wait wait...This isn't mandatory for every person on every flight you know...This one person needed to be scanned for whatever reason, and didn't want it to be done.

If it was something that was done to every passanger (Like the walk through metal detectors) then fair enough...but its not
I know it isn't mandatory for every passenger, but it's not going to be that uncommon either. Much like being selected for further baggage checks, it doesn't happen to everyone but it's quite common. If it's something that you are going to be turned away from your flight for refusing to do then it should be made apparent before the purchase of the ticket.

How many people in the thread have already said 'If you agree to the T&Cs' then it's OK to refuse to let them on the flight. It isn't in the T&Cs though.
 
I know it isn't mandatory for every passenger, but it's not going to be that uncommon either. Much like being selected for further baggage checks, it doesn't happen to everyone but it's quite common. If it's something that you are going to be turned away from your flight for refusing to do then it should be made apparent before the purchase of the ticket.

How many people in the thread have already said 'If you agree to the T&Cs' then it's OK to refuse to let them on the flight. It isn't in the T&Cs though.

It is.

Section 7a6 of the British Airways Conditions of Carriage:

Our right to refuse to carry you

We may decide to refuse to carry you or your baggage if one or more of the following has happened or we reasonably believe may happen.

7a6) If you have refused to allow a security check to be carried out on you or your baggage.


Can guarentee there's something similar in every airlines T&C.

Can't see what airline the people who refused were planning on flying with, but we can assume if BA have it then they all do. For sakes of arguments, I also checked Ryanairs.

Section 7.1.2.5 :
7.1.2 We may also refuse to carry you or your Baggage if one or more of the following have
occurred or we reasonably believe may occur:
7.1.2.5 you have refused to submit to a security check;


Some people on here are right turnips. :confused:;)
 
Last edited:
Ach you know what I mean. They aren't specific and they already know quite a few people have a problem with it. It doesn't happen at all airports, it's relatively new and many people won't see it as a standard security measure. I think it is enough of a change that it is worth hilighting to reduce the chances of stuff like that happening and people objecting.

If people want to start splitting hairs about T&Cs then I can't be bothered to argue the point :p I just think it would make their lives easier if they made it clear at the time of purchase. I also still think it's a waste of money :p
Some people on here are right turnips.
A nice way to keep the discussion at a mature level, make other people out to be stupid.
 
Last edited:
Ach you know what I mean. They aren't specific and they already know quite a few people have a problem with it. It doesn't happen at all airports, it's relatively new and many people won't see it as a standard security measure. I think it is enough of a change that it is worth hilighting to reduce the chances of stuff like that happening and people objecting.

If people want to start splitting hairs about T&Cs then I can't be bothered to argue the point :p I just think it would make their lives easier if they made it clear at the time of purchase. I also still think it's a waste of money :p

The amount of coverage that it has had in the press rules out the possibility of people seeing it as anything but a "standard security measure". The point is, they do make it clear at the time of purchase. They tell you that in purchasing a ticket you abide by their T&Cs. It is peoples own foolishness if they refuse to take the time to read them. They have no recourse if they don't.
Many people have quite a problem with a lot of the security measures though, should we pander to them all? People know the rules, people should abide by them & protest where appropraite.

Still amazes me when I travel the amount of idiots that don't know rules about liquid and what not. Been stuck in countless ques for people going through their suitcase and handluggage taking out an array of ridiculous things.]


My comment about people being turnips was a bit flippant, but you made quite an absurd comment. I'll go and add a smiley to reduce the insulting effect.
 
I do see your point and I don't have a problem submitting to the security measures that are currently in place. But you really do seem to have an issue with making things clear to people. The T&Cs don't specify what the security checks are so really you could be agreeing to anything. Would it really be that hard to have them detailed somewhere, no it wouldn't.

From this point on in I'm out as I don't have an issue with them myself :)
 
The infection thing. Probably from watching House too much, but doesn't full body radiation destroy the immune system? Obviously airport scanners aren't that extreme, but it must have some effect on the immune system.

No, xray have virtually no effect on the immune system.
Not wanting to get technical, but all this scan is likely to cause is the occasional case of cancer. It can never be directly linked to a scan, nor can it ever be proved that a scan caused a particualr cancer, but they will on law of averages cause an occasional case of cancer. Signifcantly ess cases by people taking high altitude flights in the first place.
Flying causes cancer also, but thats just life.

People don't see you naked by.... they see an image on a screen in another room in greyscale.
 
I do see your point and I don't have a problem submitting to the security measures that are currently in place. But you really do seem to have an issue with making things clear to people. The T&Cs don't specify what the security checks are so really you could be agreeing to anything. Would it really be that hard to have them detailed somewhere, no it wouldn't.

From this point on in I'm out as I don't have an issue with them myself :)

what happens if a foreign airport enacts a new security measure in between the time they order their ticket fly out and have their holiday and have to go through security on the return?

It's not in the T&C's and the airport will not allow them to fly if they don't comply. So are they then entitled to a refund from the airline for the tickets and any costs related to the delay?
 
Can this scanner pick up on variations in skin colour?

I'm going to Barcelona in a few weeks and I don't want them mistaking my wang for something else, or thinking I've injected it full of heroin.

Oh asim. :D
 
It's not in the T&C's and the airport will not allow them to fly if they don't comply. So are they then entitled to a refund from the airline for the tickets and any costs related to the delay?
I did say I'm out from this point in :p Where did I mention refunds? I was just talking about keeping people informed to cause less hassle at the gate for the person, the airport, you and me.
 
I would have done the same if I could afford to.

It is just giving away our rights for nothing. Even if they could make flights 100% secure a terrorist would simply bomb a football stadium etc.
 
Last edited:
I did say I'm out from this point in :p Where did I mention refunds? I was just talking about keeping people informed to cause less hassle at the gate for the person, the airport, you and me.

you can ring ahead before you order :p

I'm just saying by putting it all in the Tcs they open themselves to lots of hassle.
 
I wonder how many people would object if the 'guidelines' (they aren't laws, laws have oversight, but they can't be ignored either) were suddenly changed to include a cavity search tomorrow... How many here would be saying, "well, it's in the terms and conditions of flight"...

For those that say it wouldn't happen, there's as much evidence of effectiveness in such a measure as there is in the body scanners...
 
I wonder how many people would object if the 'guidelines' (they aren't laws, laws have oversight, but they can't be ignored either) were suddenly changed to include a cavity search tomorrow... How many here would be saying, "well, it's in the terms and conditions of flight"...

For those that say it wouldn't happen, there's as much evidence of effectiveness in such a measure as there is in the body scanners...
And they'll say "well if it prevents terrorism" & "flying is a luxury not a right".
 
I would have done the same if I could afford to.

It is just giving away our rights for nothing. Even if they could make flights 100% secure a terrorist would simply bomb a football stadium etc.

Why don't we stop trying to secure planes then? Let people carry guns on to them, infact, start selling C4 in the airport, why not. Because, well, they're going to hit us somewhere.

Idiot.
It doesn't take 2 minutes to get a full body xray, or are you a fan of the old fashioned cavity search? If you're propelling a massive, incredibly expensive, bit of metal at 500mph through the air, it makes sense to protect it as best you can. Sorry if you're inconvienienced by that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom