In defense of "the press," I saw EXACTLY these points made in "the press". So, "the press" isn't uniformly bad.

I admit that the press and people who do not know much about batteries have tended to get this wrong. However with the numerous devices I carry/pack I usually have at least a dozen spare AA's and AAA's for quick recharges, swap outs, etc.

I can see this slowing down my passage as the TSA checks to ensure that all my batteries do not contain lithium.

Note however the link specifically mentions:
spare Lithium-Ion and lithium metal batteries are forbidden in checked luggage
Lithium Metal Battery w/ over 2 grams of lithium, (this would be like the size of two of the 160 watt hour lithium ion camera packs they picture on the TSA link) are totally forbidden - even for carry on.

Now please, someone do the math - at moderate usage how long could I operate my N810 on 300 watt hours of battery?

gemniii42: your BP4-L is a 5.5 watt-hour battery. Assuming you can run your N810 for 6 hours of heavy use on it, the answer is roughly 325 hours of solid use -- or around two weeks of continuous heavy use. Standby time? Years, probably

Strange, I checked my copy of the US Constitution and can find no powers granted to the Federal Government to tell me what i can and can not carry and or possess.

The federal govenrnment is granted the right to regulate interstate commerce. Airlines sell interstate transportation.

Yeah, while I agree in principle with ArnimS when it comes to the Constitution, it's easy to look at these issues as constitutionalist-vs-constructionist but in the end it's really not much of a stretch to extrapolate most of the federal government's regulations from original canon. Using the strict constitutionalist arguments, one could claim we should be able to carry bombs on airplanes, too. After all, where is the restriction enumerated?

The constitution is your biggest asset and your biggest danger. Wish we had it here in the UK. It might stop the UK government turning us into the worlds biggest nanny state, and stop them poking their noses into and trying to regulate our private life's.

Because the U.K. has an unwritten constitution so to speak, IMHO, that can be both a good and a bad thing.

We should keep in mind that these rules are made with some good intention, as annoying as they are. That being said, I am still not clear on the 3oz of liquid rule. If anything over that limit is dangerous, then what is to stop 2 people from getting together and making 6oz? Logic defies me here.

Cheers

Or drinking 3oz before you get on the plane and then peeing it into the half full 6oz bottle when you reach your seat?