i've thought this was (pea)nuts for years!

the department of transportation is considering a ban of all peanut products served on planes. the prevalence and the potentially deadly consequences of severe peanut allergies have prompted them to consider this under the agency’s disability rule.

peanut allergies can be more serious than many of us realize, especially for children. while not all peanut allergies are serious enough to keep a sufferer off airplanes, when airlines serve peanuts on board as an in-flight snack, severe allergy sufferers may not even have to eat the peanuts to have a reaction. for these travelers, including many children, just the presence of peanut particles in the air can bring on a life-threatening allergic reaction. the dot believes that a severe peanut allergy counts as a disability and federal law prohibits air carriers from discriminating against individuals with a disability, so they are left wondering whether it should require specific steps for handling severe peanut allergies and what those steps should be.

congress has given the dot mixed signals on this issue over the years. the air carrier access act prohibits discrimination against those with disabilities by u.s. and foreign air carriers and requires airlines to accommodate travelers with disabilities unless doing this would cause an “undue burden” or require the airline to “fundamentally alter its services”. but in 1999, when the dot informed airlines that this applied to peanut allergies, congress withdrew dot funding for any restrictions on airline peanut practices. this ban lasted only one year, congress hasn’t re-imposed it since.

so what options are the dot considering? here are three:

* an outright ban on airlines serving peanuts and peanut products
* banning service of peanuts and peanut products only on a flight where a passenger with a peanut allergy requests a peanut-free flight in advance
* requiring the airline to provide a peanut-free buffer zone around a passenger with a medically-documented severe peanut allergy if the passenger makes a request in advance

my thought, and i do have one...is how did it take so long for this to become an issue? i am sure that the peanut lobby is doing what they can to make sure they keep their spot on planes, but i have to tell you i think it's just nuts! people with peanut allergies can have quick, violent and sometimes deadly reactions when coming near a peanut, so much so that stores that serve food (like my folk's store) and restaurant menus have to indicate when peanuts or peanut remnants can be found in their food. now, i do think that people who have allergies have to take extra steps to ensure their own safety, but i have always thought it was silly to introduce a known, common allergen, like peanuts, into a confined space! you would think that the airlines would think so too, if for no no other reason than to cover themselves. what is your point?

shoplifter steals the heart of shopkeeper

a curly-haired seven year-old was in the trendy williamsburg boutique catbird when he saw a locket in a candy dish he thought it would make a perfect mother's day gift, so he took it and brought it home. (happy mother's day!) when his family realized that the gift was as hot as it was heartfelt they made the boy bring it back, which he did along with a note:

"dear catbird people. sorry I took the locket. my sister said what is a good mother's day gift? that day i thought that the locket would be a great present, so i picked one and i didn't know they cost anything so i put it in my pocket."

staffers said the youngster handed over the $15 locket when he came in with his dad, who nudged him toward the sales counter where, standing three-feet tall and a little teary-eyed, he told the clerk "i have something for you." the store clerk said : "thank you for doing the right thing."

according to the store's blog (where they posted the apology letter) they won't be pressing charges. "sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. or, at least the cost of a $15 locket," they wrote. "have you seen anything sweeter?" the owner said that indeed the necklace was in a candy dish on a table and the kid could have mistaken for something free. additionally, he feels that this is a valuable experience the boy won't soon forget.

the neighborhood has had some recent issues of shoplifting and some co-workers at the boutique hope that their forgiving nature will not come back to haunt them. "we do have some shoplifting in here, but it's usually adults. it's not a major issue...but after people find out about this, every shoplifter in the city is going to come to the store because we are so lenient."

my point, and i do have one...is, i think that this scenario showed the best in all involved. the boy for wanting to do something nice for his mom, the parents for first identifying that the gift was stolen and then making him bring it back, the store owner for keeping it all in perspective and not pressing charges and then, hopefully in the end, the boy learning a valuable lesson. (that all being said, dude...you totally threw your sister under the bus in that note, like if she didn't make you think about what a good gift was you wouldn't have stolen it - ha!) what is your point?