Maybe you’ve already heard this one, but I only happened to catch it in a newspaper while I was on vacation:
TSA will no longer ban common lighters in carry-on luggage starting August 4, 2007. Torch lighters remain banned in carry-ons.
Lifting the lighter ban is consistent with TSA’s risk-based approach to aviation security. First and foremost, lighters no longer pose a significant threat.
So someone can now bring a device through security that lets them start a fire on the plane, but you can’t bring enough water with you to put it out. Makes perfect sense to me. You might find yourself wondering why it is that "lighters no longer pose a significant threat"–which apparently means they once did–but good luck finding out from the TSA news release, which assiduously sidesteps the issue. Then again, maybe it’s better not to probe too deeply, since it’s actually quite comforting to learn that fire on an airplane is no longer dangerous!
So how did this come about?
"We have worked closely with the TSA and the Department of Transportation on this issue and are relieved to see the ban lifted in the United States," said Greg Booth, president and CEO of Zippo Manufacturing Company, in a statement today. …
"The work conducted by Zippo with support from Pennsylvania 5th District Rep. John Peterson and Pennsylvania Senators Arlen Specter and Robert Casey led to an exemption allowing lighters in carry-on luggage," Booth said.
I imagine you’ll be somewhat less than shocked to learn that Zippo is headquartered in Bradford, Pennsylvania. This is probably just a coincidence, though; it would be unpardonably cynical to conclude that the economic interests of a Pennsylvania corporation factored higher in the minds of these Pennsylvania legislators than the security of the general public. After all, at some point in the last two years lighters stopped posing a significant security threat.
When I first heard this news I was wondering why Zippo in particular would want the ban lifted; surely having lighters confiscated is good for their sales? But in thinking about it a bit more I realized that smokers would be more likely to buy a cheap disposable lighter than another Zippo, especially if they knew it might end up being confiscated as well. And sure enough, here’s what one smoker had to say when he was informed that the ban was going to be lifted:
“I’m going to get me a nice, shiny $20 lighter and carry it in my pocket,” he said. “A big ol’ Zippo.”
Mission accomplished! It’s nice to know the system works–if you’re a corporation that can convince a Representative and a few Senators to look after your bottom line, that is. If you’re just a million citizens trying to get criminals removed from public office, you’re out of luck.
The Distant Ocean 
Turns out one of the big motivators for declaring lighters “no longer a threat” was the expense of exposing of all the confiscated lighters. Unlike confiscated water, you can’t just throw them in the trash.
Feeling safer yet? (Feeling stupid yet?)
LikeLike
Yep, the disposal reason was mentioned prominently in most of the articles I read. And if TSA had only said, look, banning lighters was an overreaction and was never necessary, plus it’s a serious pain in the ass, I’d be less critical of their decision (though I may still disagree). But instead they claimed that the security threat posed by lighters has somehow changed in the past two years, which makes no sense; either they were never a significant threat or they were always a significant threat.
It reminds me of corporations that will pay out millions of dollars for settlements, but only on the condition that they admit no fault (regardless of the facts).
LikeLike
Thanks for this, and for much else. Keep up the good work.
Cheers
WP
LikeLike
Thanks for the support. I only happened across this tidbit because my parents live close to Bradford (where Zippo is headquartered), so the local papers were all covering the story.
LikeLike