Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

TSA Airport Screenings Now Start Before You Arrive At the Airport

timothy posted about a year ago | from the we-call-this-the-might-fly-list dept.

Government 437

Bob the Super Hamste writes "The New York Times is reporting that the TSA is now doing background investigations on passengers before they arrive at the airport. The publicly stated reason for this is that it is to streamline the security procedures at airports allowing more passengers to receive less scrutiny while at the air port but this new authority allows the TSA additional information about each traveler. The prescreening that is being performed for domestic travel now uses a simiar standard to that of foreign individuals who where entering the US. The new measures go beyond what is used in the Secure Flight program and while light on details mentions that the passengers passport number will be used. The article does however point out the data sources that are available to the TSA to conduct these pre-screening with such as tax identification number, past travel itineraries, property records, physical characteristics, and law enforcement or intelligence information. Also mentioned is that individuals who do not have a passport will not be subjected to the rules and from my reading will not be eligible for lesser screening at that airport. The stated goal of this program is to have 25% of all airline passengers in the US receive lighter screening at the airport so that they don't have to take their shoes off, remove jackets, or remove laptops from bags. Additionally passengers who are in higher risk categories can receive additional screenings. Also mentioned is that all passengers are currently prescreened and that airlines are required to share your passport data with the TSA if they have it." One thing I've noticed as a passenger is that the most dangerous-feeling aspect of flying right now seems to be the winding security line itself.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sounds ominous, but... (5, Interesting)

n1ywb (555767) | about a year ago | (#45200289)

I practically died with joy the first time I got to use a pre-check lane. Kept my coat, shoes, and belt on, didn't take shit out of my bags. It almost justified the 8 hours it took me to get a global entry card (drive to boston, wait, talk to beurocrats about how I'm not a threat, drive back to vermont).

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200301)

Why did you have shit in your bags? To me, this would have been an obvious warning sign of a deviant which would have meant you don't fly today.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200867)

Better than shit for brains.

THE "TEA PARTY" IS A LYING SACK-OF-SHIT CHARADE (-1, Flamebait)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year ago | (#45200893)

OBAMACare?

Why not defund TSA information collection , and the "porno-scanning"?

"Cause of Liberty" my arse! If they don't "shutdown" Government over the introduction of Gestapo-style "internal passports" then you can see what they really are:
White Sheets and Brown Shirts.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Insightful)

stewsters (1406737) | about a year ago | (#45200317)

Before 9/11 that's how everyone was treated. Without that 8 hour Boston trip.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Informative)

WillAdams (45638) | about a year ago | (#45200389)

Not only that, but no ID was necessary --- I once flew under an alias 'cause I was curious if it could be done --- even got a military ticket discount even though I never showed my military ID card (which had my proper name).

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200739)

Well, other than the on again, off again, on again security measures that were put in place starting with the Palestinian terrorist hijackings and flight to Cuba hijackings of the 1960s and 1970s. If you claim to have never had to go through a metal detector, or have a bag searched, prior to 9/11, you must not have done any air travel in the decades before 9/11.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Insightful)

smooth wombat (796938) | about a year ago | (#45200339)

So what you're saying is you handed over your information to these hacks to prove you weren't a criminal, rather than being presumed innocent from the start. And you consider having to prove you're not a criminal a good thing?

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about a year ago | (#45200367)

So what you're saying is you handed over your information to these hacks to prove you weren't a criminal, rather than being presumed innocent from the start. And you consider having to prove you're not a criminal a good thing?

Actual, Pre is a side benefit from Global Entry. GE lets you bypass immigration by using a bio scanner as well as use a special customs lane. Years ago they had it for free from US - Canada; which was great during tourist season or when cruise ships docked..

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200815)

For some reason that reminded me of Gargoyles...

Gargoyles are no fun to talk to. They never finish a sentence. They are adrift in a laser-drawn world, scanning retinas in all directions, doing background checks on everyone within a thousand yards, seeing everything in visual light, infrared, millimeter-wave radar, and ultrasound all at once. You think they’re talking to you, but they’re actually poring over the credit record of some stranger on the other side of the room, or identifying the make and model of airplanes flying overhead. For all he knows, Lagos is standing there measuring the length of Hiro’s cock through his trousers while they pretend to make conversation...The payoff for this self-imposed ostracism is you can be in the Metaverse all the time, and gather data all the time.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200885)

tl;dr

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45200383)

Yeah, I'm sure he'd much rather be famous for yelling "Don't touch my junk bro!" on YouTube.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200507)

Supposed you'd rather "Charlie bit me".

I don't think I'd be saying "Don't touch my junk bro" but I would loudly say, "it tickles when you touch me there".

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Informative)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200355)

"I practically died with joy when I learnt that they'd stop beating me if I'd just get on my knees."

Coward.

I stopped visiting the US (and I used to go semi-regularly on business) once all this TSA shit started. Such a shame other people put their bank account before their sense of decency.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45200395)

You call him a coward, yet your solution to the same problem is to run away.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2, Informative)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200443)

Stopping visits is not the same as running away, matey.

I continue to campaign against similar regressions in my home country, England, which has had a far more significant terror problem, and dealt with it by jaw-jaw.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200529)

Can't comment on the England having more terrorist issues than the US, but I'll take your word for it.

I just recently learned that Russia has a far worse problem with it than we do here in the US. I can easily believe that of all countries we have less of an issue with terrorism than the rest of the world.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (4, Informative)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#45200583)

Can't comment on the England having more terrorist issues than the US, but I'll take your word for it.

You're probably young, then. I can remember when the Irish Republican Army was conducting terror attacks in and around Britain.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200667)

I remember that, it was back in the mid 70's wasn't it.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200877)

No, it started in the 1930s (although their issue actually goes back centuries), then it died off for a while before the IRA started their campaign to murder women with children that were out shopping in the 70s. This continued through to the early 2000s where businesses became focal points for their terrorism (get to kill more people in an office than a shop or pub).

It wasn't just murdering innocents, you'd have IRA bomb scares very regularly even when there were no bombs. This obviously caused a huge amount of disruption, not just to offices being evacuated, but roads being closed.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200613)

We had the pIRA. Bomb in London nearly caught my dad in the early '90s. This weekend I walked past the Brighton Grand Hotel, which was blown up in 1984 in a failed attempt to assassinate Thatcher and her puppets (they couldn't even get that right!). etc.

This only turned around when the government did the only progressive thing I've seen in British politics in the last 34 years: kick the bastards on all sides into a room and talk with them.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#45200809)

Can't comment on the England having more terrorist issues than the US, but I'll take your word for it.

It's always weird when I hear young folks claiming no knowledge of stuff that was front-page news in my youth. It's not their fault -- kids who weren't born until after I reached adulthood may never know about this stuff, since it'll fall in the 30-ish year history gap in school -- too recent to be in books, too old to be remembered. My grand-kids will learn it as ancient history. Me, I guess I'd know nothing about Korea and Vietnam except for M*A*S*H, Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, etc. My wife's young enough to have learned everything she knows about the Iran Hostage Crisis from the movie Argo.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45200635)

Stopping visits is not the same as running away, matey.

It certainly isn't "brave". You are accusing someone of being a coward.

jaw-jaw

I'm not really familiar with that phrase, but Google says it means to talk. I thought the UK was wall-to-wall closed circuit cameras? I'm also not sure that Ireland would agree that it was dealt with through discussion. The terror threat isn't a country-by-country contest - I think we're on the same team.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200657)

That's London and maybe a few other cities, it's not the whole country that's wall-to-wall cctv.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45200705)

In other words, wherever there was terrorism?

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200835)

It was partly a response to that. Brighton didn't get all camera-happy after the government of the time were bombed while staying at a local hotel. But I guess that wasn't really terrorism, rather a good old-fashioned mass assassination attempt.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200791)

It certainly isn't "brave". You are accusing someone of being a coward.

False dichotomy. I certainly didn't regard it as brave that I gave up a good business opportunity because I was repulsed by America's behaviour at the beginning of the previous decade - I regarded it as the right thing to do. I picked myself up and went on to something else.

I'm not really familiar with that phrase, but Google says it means to talk.

...and it should evoke Churchill's famous remark.

I thought the UK was wall-to-wall closed circuit cameras?

No, but if you include private CCTV then there's quite a lot - especially in the centre of London, because, you know, cameras to record your visible behaviour on public streets are less intrusive than having a hand fondling your child and your grandmother or giving you a background check.

I'm also not sure that Ireland would agree that it was dealt with through discussion.

Well, one side represented some of the most extreme of Ireland's views, and Ireland herself has since welcomed a visit by the Queen. So, on the whole, I'd say that Ireland is more pleased about the Good Friday Agreement than some of the southern US states will ever be about the outcome of the Civil War.

The terror threat isn't a country-by-country contest

Agreed, but if the US wants to know how to deal with an imaginary terror threat, it could at least start by looking at a similar country which experienced a real terror threat.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200891)

None of us outside US have any obligation to visit the States, and talk about the ultimate Hypocrisy... you Yanks are constantly waving your precious free market and "vote with your dollars" in our faces, yet when we decide to do just that and not visit US, not buy American products, you complain.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200467)

I stopped visiting the US (and I used to go semi-regularly on business) once all this TSA shit started

Nobody noticed.

Foreign visitors to U.S. hit record in 2011 [reuters.com]

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (0)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45200521)

Yeah, the world's full of short-sighted lackadaisy and pusillanimity - thanks for reminding me.

Still going to strive to set a good example, though. Good things take time.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#45200377)

Hmmm so if someone was a threat, they would want one of these pre-check cards? Seems like anyone with a pre-check card should be considered suspect and marked for enhanced scrutiny.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | about a year ago | (#45200473)

I practically died with joy the first time I got to use a pre-check lane. Kept my coat, shoes, and belt on, didn't take shit out of my bags. It almost justified the 8 hours it took me to get a global entry card (drive to boston, wait, talk to beurocrats about how I'm not a threat, drive back to vermont).

I missed the "with joy" part of that the first time I read it. I thought perhaps the TSA goons tried to murder you because you wouldn't take your coat, shoes or belt off.

Tax Identification Number (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200485)

Can someone tell me why the TSA would need to check Tax Identification numbers in order for someone to get on a plane? I can see it now, "I'm sorry sir, we have some questions about these deductions you claimed on your 2011 tax returns. We are going to have to ask you to step into the special screening lane and talk to our TSA auditors."

Re:Tax Identification Number (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200509)

Because the the TSA is a bunch of idiots trying to seem important.

Re:Tax Identification Number (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200713)

because not everyone has a SSN, so the PC term for your national id number is FTIN or tax number.

Re:Tax Identification Number (2)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#45200873)

Can someone tell me why the TSA would need to check Tax Identification numbers in order for someone to get on a plane?

For an individual, your "Tax Identification Number" is your Social Security Number. For a US citizen or resident, it's your GUID, the key by which everything is indexed, tax-related or otherwise.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#45200587)

I practically died with joy the first time I got to use a pre-check lane. Kept my coat, shoes, and belt on, didn't take shit out of my bags. It almost justified the 8 hours it took me to get a global entry card (drive to boston, wait, talk to beurocrats about how I'm not a threat, drive back to vermont).

Sounds like a battered housewife, explaining how the fact that her abusive husband only blacked one eye in his latest drunken rage means he really does love her.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200695)

You know what will destroy the domestic airline industry? Self driving cars. Oh there will still be some for those who do not want to 'wait in a car'. But you can make coast to coast in under 48 hours. Better if we could go faster and drive safely (which auto driving cars will allow). I suspect it will also eviscerate the hotel industry (or at least radically change them into a parking garage/lot sort of arrangement). As to make a 48 hour trip you will need somewhere to sleep (and not a car seat). So when you get where ever you will stay in your car.

For international it will be business as usual.

They better get their act together.

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (1)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about a year ago | (#45200769)

I practically died with joy the first time I got to use a pre-check lane. Kept my coat, shoes, and belt on, didn't take shit out of my bags. It almost justified the 8 hours it took me to get a global entry card (drive to boston, wait, talk to beurocrats about how I'm not a threat, drive back to vermont).

This is how far we've come. It is now refreshing when we are treated like respectable human beings. And you only had to jump through 8 hours of hoops!

Re:Sounds ominous, but... (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45200781)

"At least they're not doing XYZ" is the language of one living under a tyrannical regime. This is not how a free society operates. The colonists revolted over less.

...because there is a new threat? (2)

erroneus (253617) | about a year ago | (#45200299)

See, they aren't even attempting to cloak this under a new threat of some kind. Now they are just trying to pretend it makes things more efficient. It won't. They will still scan you and your belongings. You will still not be able to save a few bucks by bringing your own drinks on board or even within the airport. You will still have to spend extra money on "travel-sized" things in order to comply with their nonsense.

As if.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200313)

..they ever discovered something or prevented anything. Just pretending to be doing something "for your own protection". Heh. Pure waste of time. Not really resources, as it keeps them off the street.

This is news...? (2)

beaverdownunder (1822050) | about a year ago | (#45200321)

This might be news on domestic flights but a few years back, arriving in LA from Australia, I was actually directly offered to step out of the international queue (I'm Canadian, but was with my Australian partner) to go into the US queue _without identifying myself_, that is I was directly solicited without volunteering any information about my nationality first.

Sure, they could have overheard my accent. But, on several other occasions I and my Australian partner arrived at the same time, with the same itineraries and the same bookings, and she always got SSSS and I didn't. I don't think I just got a pass for being Canadian. There has to have been more to it than that.

Re:This is news...? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200461)

No, you're Canadian. You people are awesome, we would allow you to carry a vulcan cannon through customs if we wouldn't get people complaining.

Re:This is news...? (2)

LeadSongDog (1120683) | about a year ago | (#45200523)

No, you're Canadian. You people are awesome, we would allow you to carry a vulcan cannon through customs if we wouldn't get people complaining.

Sure, but would you object to our Romulan cloaking system? Oh... wait... you didn't know about that...

Re:This is news...? (3, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | about a year ago | (#45200499)

I don't think I just got a pass for being Canadian. There has to have been more to it than that.

Given how screwed up LAX is (and I know it well) I think that it is more likely that they were trying to balance the load between the US and residents line and the foreigners line.

Re:This is news...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200595)

You forgot "blindly violating policies for their own short-term convenience", which is pretty much what happens when you hire high-school graduates to lord over the public.

TSA: Now with more NSA! (2)

larry bagina (561269) | about a year ago | (#45200343)

We know that the NSA launders information to the DEA and FBI. Looks like we can add the TSA to that list!

Don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200345)

I am not going to visit that country. I wanted to, but I don't want to anymore. Let the world know when you've dealt with your fascists.

Re:Don't care (1)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about a year ago | (#45200851)

I am not going to visit that country. I wanted to, but I don't want to anymore. Let the world know when you've dealt with your fascists.

Unfortunately, there is a scenario I could foresee that involves the rest of the world dealing with our fascists.

Unbelievable. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200347)

“The average person doesn’t understand how much intelligence-driven matching is going on and how this could be accessed for other purposes,” said Khaliah Barnes, a lawyer with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which has fought to block these initiatives. “There’s no meaningful oversight, transparency or accountability.”

I'm not American, but I find it mind boggling how the United States is depicted as the land of the free and yet this goes on. Surely, it's a joke, right?

Re:Unbelievable. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200497)

Surely, it's a joke, right?

Yes, but the joke's on us.

Re:Unbelievable. (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200559)

Yes it is a joke.

Sadly we the US citizens are the butt of the joke.

Security line issue? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200369)

How about creating a TSA-like security check in order to get into the security-check line. So as soon as you arrive at the end of the line, you get checked. Although, the problem with this would be the creation of a new line leading up to the current security-check line. Although, the solution to that would be to have a security-check line at the end of that line too. And so on and so forth.

Maybe it's time to get rid of the TSA and require airports to implement their own "reasonable" security practices? Because what was mentioned in the article seems dangerous for our civil liberties. It's like the government is getting to the point of mandating who can and cannot travel across this country. Although, I think the No Fly list does that already.

Haha (3, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year ago | (#45200371)

One thing I've noticed as a passenger is that the most dangerous-feeling aspect of flying right now seems to be the winding security line itself.

You've obviously never ridden on a CRJ.

Re:Haha (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about a year ago | (#45200631)

You've obviously never ridden on a CRJ.

A CRJ feels a lot safer than Saabs ever did, and the oldest of CRJ aircraft are still newer than the newest of Mad Dogs. About 10-12 years ago I had to fly in a Saab from Atlanta to Bristol/Tri-Cities, which is surrounded by mountains. Everyone knows prop planes are drawn to mountains like tornadoes to trailer parks.

Re:Haha (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#45200651)

I've flown often enough to have experienced a couple of non-scheduled landings due to mechanical issues.

The story is of course baloney.

Hey, TSA, why don't you just ask me? (3, Insightful)

yayoubetcha (893774) | about a year ago | (#45200375)

If you simply ask me: "Would you care to go through an extensive background check in order to zip through security?" I would say, "sure".

So, US Government, why not just ask the citizens occasionally for their permission, instead of the default unconstitutional spying.

Re:Hey, TSA, why don't you just ask me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200561)

I guess that's the idea for people who have passports, who theoretically have been subjected to greater scrutiny, but to me it just reads like "security loophole".

Expensive (5, Informative)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about a year ago | (#45200381)

We sure pay a heavy price for our politicians' love of meddling in the Middle East.

Re:Expensive (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200663)

The world is paying a heavy price for a small percentage of more than a billion Muslims (still a large number of people) deciding they intend to bomb and behead their way back towards what they consider to be the glory days of Islam hundreds of years ago when the Muslim empires were at their height and even threatened to conquer Europe. If you don't understand that you are almost guaranteed to make the wrong policy choices in dealing with them. Making the wrong choices will mean the problem lasts longer, or is more violent than it could be. Do you understand that they even want to take back Spain as a Muslim land [jihadwatch.org] ? Upping the grain subsidies to Somalia or cutting off funding for democracy programs in Iraq isn't going to fix that. This isn't the first time in history this sort of movement has occurred. Those previous examples weren't the fault of the US either since in at least some cases the US either didn't exist, or it wasn't involved in the region. The US isn't so important that every problem in the world is its fault. People in other parts of the world are known to create their own problems without US assistance. This is one of those cases.

Re:Expensive (1)

Kohath (38547) | about a year ago | (#45200845)

Nigerians are paying a higher price. [google.com] I guess you think Nigeria's politicians also meddle in the Middle East?

Also Thailand. [nytimes.com] They had 173 terrorist incidents in 2011. Their government must meddle in the Middle East a lot.

That must be it.

War on Terror (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200411)

Mission accomplished.

Captcha: BOOM

Pre-Check (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200421)

Serious question here: as a civilian electronics engineer working for the DoD, I had to go through a rigorous background check, interview process, and polygraph to obtain my current clearance level and job. This costs an extraordinary amount of money (likely over $10K [clearancejobs.com] ), why the hell do I have to pay and go through yet another background check and interview process for pre-check?

One would think that we'd be in the business of trying to save some time and money these days....

Re:Pre-Check (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200459)

I wondered the same things and I have gotten clearance from both the US and Israeli governments with detailed background checks in both cases. Yet every time the TSA feels the need to dig though my bags and I frequently get pulled aside for additional screening.

Re:Pre-Check (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200607)

'One would think that we'd be in the business of trying to save some time and money these days....'

Debt ceiling... ACA... ACA broken website... government shutdown...

Do you not read or hear the news.

This government doesn't give 2 shits about the people or our freedoms or our tax money.

will you take action? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200425)

Is anyone seriously very tired of this ridiculous nonsense, or will we continue along as a weak society dominated by tyrants with a hidden until accidentally revealed agenda? Specifically appealing to the intelligent crowd here on /. - will people please pick up everything and make the sacrifice to once and for all, permanently leave this dump of a country behind? We are the ones suffering, the earners who unwilling, like it or not, continue to fund this nonsense. Let people who are desperate or foolish enough to immigrate here put up with it. We need to start voting with our talent, wallet and feet.

Re:will you take action? (2)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200639)

I'm planning on ex-pat'ing to Korea. Hopefully I'll have enough money to do it sooner rather than later.

But yes, I'm ready to leave the country of my birth as it's evolved into someplace not so nice to live.

I feel like a modern day slave, left just enough of my pay to survive.

on 2nd thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200427)

maybe i wont wear my nsa t shirt

https://www.google.com/#q=nsa+t+shirt [google.com]

a fascist attempt to restrict travel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200449)

it kind of hurts to see freedom slipping away...

Laugh (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200455)

"One thing I've noticed as a passenger is that the most dangerous-feeling aspect of flying right now seems to be the winding security line itself."

That's the same feeling the second cow in line has on its way up the ramp to a bolt in the head

Coming to a Soviet state near you (3, Interesting)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#45200463)

Soon passports will be required for domestic travel...

Re:Coming to a Soviet state near you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200495)

Soon passports will be required for domestic travel...

Capt. Vasili Borodin: I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?

Captain Ramius: I suppose.

Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?

Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.

My my, how times have changed.

Re:Coming to a Soviet state near you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200615)

Newsflash, in most of Europe you are required to carry ID at all times, e.g. drivers licence. For Schengen coutries this makes sense, given that there are no checks at the border. Instead you get stopped at random, often on trains etc but also on the street if you look like a gypsy/otherwise suspicious.

Fine for non-compliance is usually 10 euro, but if they don't like your face they can haul you down to the station and make some hassle too, which typically cost more than €10 worth of your time. Sometimes a LOT more.

Re:Coming to a Soviet state near you (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#45200653)

Soon passports will be required for domestic travel...

That was actually proposed a few years ago.

They didn't refer to them as "internal passports", but the first thing I thought of was how we use to mock the Soviet Union for such things... while apparently they were just blazing the trail for America to follow.

Why i will never return to the USA.... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200469)

Outside view on US customs. This is an article from a Dutch writer who was treated quite shabbily at the US borders:
http://dasmag.nl/why-i-will-never-return-to-the-usa/

Complete BULLSHIT (1, Interesting)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about a year ago | (#45200475)

So while they spin this as "you'll get through screening quicker" what they really want is background checks on nearly everyone that travels by plane.

Fucking seriously let's save all that tax money and the tax money being wasted now, and just racially profile. What's the fucking problem?

On the other side of that, I have not flown commercially since before 9/11 and don't plan on it anytime soon.

Re: Complete BULLSHIT (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | about a year ago | (#45200661)

Racial profiling is a step forward, but I wouldn't trust that metric. What should be profiled is an Islamic background. Last I checked, non-Muslims weren't an airline threat.

Re:Complete BULLSHIT (2)

ImOuttaHere (2996813) | about a year ago | (#45200685)

It's actually easier than racial profiling anyone. Simply require the agencies of Law and Order to do their jobs and to track people who actually _are_ terrorists.

Short of that, does anyone really feel safer for all this "security state" oversight? Come on! Oh paranoid and fearful do you need to be to "buy into" this BS? Apparently quite fearful and paranoid, from the looks of things.

most dangerous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200501)

The most dangerous aspect of flying is, by far, the drive to the airport. The money we waste on additional "security" at the airport over what we had pre-911 would be much better spent on driverless car research.

Security line (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200511)

"One thing I've noticed as a passenger is that the most dangerous-feeling aspect of flying right now seems to be the winding security line itself."

Exactly this. You wouldn't need to worry about getting past security, or even having a plane ticket, to cause all kinds of panic & pandemonium with a b*mb. At times there are hundreds of people standing in those lines in the larger airports...

I think its good. (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about a year ago | (#45200519)

Look... nearly everything the government has done after 9/11 to stop 9/11 from happening again would not actually stop it from happening.

The people that did that would not have been stopped by more robust baggage screening. Even an air marshal might not have stopped them.

Passenger profiles can stop bad people because it isn't about what clever way they've come up with to sneak something dangerous on to the plane. Rather, you just look for bad people and ignore what is in their baggage because it doesn't matter. That person doesn't fly. This is in large part how the israelis do it. And say what you will about their politics, we can agree that they're under greater threat of terrorism pretty much constantly and yet how many of their planes are hijacked or even interfered with in any way shape or form? Exactly.

This is how you do it. Not by asking people to take their shoes off. You do a background check on every single person that wants to fly. 99.99999 percent of the population will know the bliss of pre-9/11 air travel while a tiny minority will get to spend some uncomfortable time in a back room getting grilled... largely with justification.

Re:I think its good. (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about a year ago | (#45200609)

Look... nearly everything the government has done after 9/11 to stop 9/11 from happening again would not actually stop it from happening.

That's not true.

It would stop it from happening again if terrorists were stupid enough to reuse exactly the same plot. with the exact kind of knife that is now screened for at security and so on....

It would not stop anything if they came up with something slightly original. Like perhaps an attack on the queue at the security checkpoint.....

Re:I think its good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200671)

But what would have stopped the hijackers on 9/11 is locking hardened cockpit doors which has been done. Also I doubt background checks would have stopped the 9/11 hijackers because they were basically fine upstanding visitors from that perspective.

Really? (2, Funny)

John Napkintosh (140126) | about a year ago | (#45200531)

"One thing I've noticed as a passenger is that the most dangerous-feeling aspect of flying right now seems to be the winding security line itself."

Really? I despise the TSA and the burdensome screening process as much as the next person, and this is far from sympathising, but you honestly mean to say you felt endangered by the screening process? Of all the legitimate dangers you face in your daily life, and you're going to try to convince people that walking through a winding line and submitting to largely no-contact screening makes you fearful? And then you expect people to take you just as seriously after that?

Re:Really? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200637)

I think he was more pointing out that that huge crowd of people that can't evacuate the area easily or quickly is actually a pretty prime target for terrorist mayhem.

Re:Really? (2)

GungaDan (195739) | about a year ago | (#45200675)

I think the parent poster meant to indicate that the security line itself presents a target for attack, rather than that the screening process (aside from the requirement of a lengthy queue) was dangerous.

I might debate that, though, having suffered a cut on the sole of my foot from broken glass on the floor in one of those lines, past the "remove your shoes now" sign. Stay classy, Milwaukee International.

Re:Really? (1)

Bugler412 (2610815) | about a year ago | (#45200681)

what makes it fearful to those that are squeamish that way is the large concentration of people in a single location, not the screening itself. The screening line is a big juicy target OUTSIDE the secured area for some that are inclined to take that sort of action.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200731)

Where do you think the most people are the most vulnerable to a terrorist attack directed at airline travel? Hint: It's not on the planes anymore.

Launch an attack in the crowded, stagnant security line, where all the unchecked, uninspected, unsearched, people are standing in wait and you'll shut down all the airlines just as quickly as they were shut down on 9/11. The only thing you won't do is take down a plane or a non-airport building in the process.

Re:Really? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200833)

As the submitter (posting anonymously to preserve mods) that final line is the opinion of Timothy the editor who probably still sleeps with his blankie every night for fear of the monsters under the bead. I wanted to bring attention to this since so many people believed that this would never happen to US citizens traveling domestically. I read the article in my local paper this morning (republished from the NYT) and have already contacted by elected representatives (Kline, klobuchar, Franken) who will in all likelihood ignore me as usual.

TSA, the so-so no-results money can buy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200567)

I really think all the security after 9/11 has amounted to a large bill for the public and nothing more. I felt safer when people could be fired from their jobs for no doing it right, but now we have government employees in the airport and they can't get fired even when they seem to try. Get rid of the TSA. Besides, the NSA knows everything about us. Let's them pre-screen us.

TSA, NSA (5, Insightful)

Phoenix666 (184391) | about a year ago | (#45200643)

The science and the math behind the tools of control are not classified. There is no classified physics, chemistry, and math. You and I can access them and learn. The components and sensors and knowledge required to build resistance measures are open source. You and I can see them, understand them, and employ them. In Today's--though perhaps not in "Tomorrow's"--America, you can still acquire the tools you need to resist and defeat Tyranny.

Take stock. Search your own heart. Can you live in a world where you are not free? Most of you will choose controlled comfort. You will cede control over your very existence to some remote, faceless drone within a bureaucracy, be it government- or corporate-controlled. Still there are a few who would rather die, no matter how much they have to lose, than acquiesce to petty, stupid tyrants.

I have a wife and kids. I love them dearly. I want to live a long life with them. But if I could trade my life for their freedom, I would do so in an instant. Those of you who are like me, assess and consider. We have been in a bubble of denial, but now that time is over. We all must choose whether to stand and be counted, or to kneel and submit. Choose the former and you're an American, choose the latter and you're a slave.

Decide.

The new standard in air travel (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year ago | (#45200659)

Terrorisom by TSA is for your own protection against terrorism

How does this compare to the way Israel does it? (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about a year ago | (#45200703)

I've always heard about Israeli-style airport security being top notch. That's to say that they apply a level of intelligence, instead of blindly molesting passengers. Can anyone comment on how this methodology compares to the way they do it in Israel? Thanks!

What I don't mind (5, Insightful)

bickerdyke (670000) | about a year ago | (#45200719)

I don't mind having my jacket/coat X-rayed.
I don't mind having my laptop X-rayed seperatly.

I can live with my shoes being x-rayed.

But what pisses me of is that I have to do all of this without proper infrastructure at the checkpoint. Those lines are still designed for people walking through the scanner in paralell to one item going through X-ray. Pick up your carry on after the scanner and walk on. But now this design gets clogged up by people like me who are unfortunately born with only two arms and hands and therefor CANT'T pick up their stuff as it comes out of the X-ray item by item. That's what bags were invented for!

I apologize to all people who had to wait behind me because I had to repack my bag, re-tie my shoes and wear my belt again. I'm sorry, but I can't remove that stuff all at once.

I've got a better idea. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200733)

The stated goal of this program is to have 25% of all airline passengers in the US receive lighter screening at the airport so that they don't have to take their shoes off, remove jackets, or remove laptops from bags.

This is an absolutely worthless goal.
These things aren't that difficult to do, and usually are not a problem for people to do.
Here's a better goal: ditch the fucking full body scanners, and stop abusing people with pacemakers and other required medical devices.

How Many Votes Would I Get? (5, Interesting)

Greyfox (87712) | about a year ago | (#45200763)

"If elected I promise to introduce legislation to disband the TSA, NSA and DEA. If it fails I will introduce it again. I will introduce it and introduce it until it passes or my term ends."

Good news.... (1)

mseeger (40923) | about a year ago | (#45200813)

Good news everyone: if you refrain from bitching about the ?SA on Slashdot, you will be allowed to board faster. Thank you for your cooperation :-(.

To expedite ... (3, Funny)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#45200831)

... body cavity searches, the TSA kindly requests that you remove your pants prior to arriving at the airport.

Debt Collection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45200865)

Besides all the other issues, this concerns me,

"For instance, an update about the T.S.A.’s Transportation Security Enforcement Record System, which contains information about travelers accused of “violations or potential violations” of security regulations, warns that the records may be shared with “a debt collection agency for the purpose of debt collection.” "

Why is the TSA sharing records with debt collectors?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?