Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security Transportation IT

Pay the TSA $100 and Bypass Airport Security 527

Posted by samzenpus
from the front-of-the-line dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Catching a flight in the U.S. isn't a great experience anymore due to the security checks involved. You have to remove your shoes, your belt, get your laptop out, be scanned and subjected to radiation in the process. Hundreds of other people are doing the same thing, meaning it takes 40 minutes instead of four. Now, the TSA has come up with a clever, money-making alternative. Instead of scaling back security or speeding it up, you can instead pay $100 and bypass it completely!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pay the TSA $100 and Bypass Airport Security

Comments Filter:
  • by Narcocide (102829) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:17PM (#39372265) Homepage

    But I'd pay double to just be shot out of a cannon at the target landing zone or something - anything instead of having to spend the rest of the 6 hour journey with the same people I had to stand in line with.

  • Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wbr1 (2538558) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:18PM (#39372267)
    Secuity theater has been on the decline from comedy to tragedy for a while. Now it is simply a farce. It is about control and money and the illusion of security.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:25PM (#39372347)

      "Sorry, citizen, now that it's in the Free Market, it's no longer our concern. We trust that you understand, and remind you that you may worship at the Wal-Mart of your choice."

      • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:45PM (#39372589)
        Because it's free market when it's government regulations...
      • by game kid (805301) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:07PM (#39372783) Homepage

        The TSA will be checking at the aisles there soon too. The agents will double as customer service.

        "Welcome to Wal-Mart! Would you like a shakedown, staredown, or gropedown?"

        "Nah, I just want a flatscree--"

        "GUARDS! Terrorist with a bomb and a Quran on aisle 5!"

        "I can barely read the New York Post let alo--" *gets tackled to floor with a thud*

        • Re:Thespians (Score:4, Insightful)

          by rubycodez (864176) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:42PM (#39373005)
          DHS had a virtual presence there already. on all the monitors before the checkout line was PSA with the butt-ugly dumpy mug of Janet Reno, saying to turn in your fellow american if they were acting suspiciously. God damn, don't people under 40 see what's happening?
          • by Jawnn (445279)

            DHS had a virtual presence there already. on all the monitors before the checkout line was PSA with the butt-ugly dumpy mug of Janet Reno, saying to turn in your fellow american if they were acting suspiciously. God damn, don't people under 40 see what's happening?

            I don't know, but there's an awful lot of the over-65 crowd that sure has hell don't.

            • by rubycodez (864176) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @11:05PM (#39373563)
              well, that's not true among my older friends and relatives, they routinely get in the face of authority like TSA, cops, politicians on our police-street direction at the drop of a hat. hard to intimidate someone in the 70s or more, e.g. "what are going to do, sonny-boy-with-a-badge, jail me for life? give me the chair? hah, I'll probably flop over dead tomorrow anyway! screw you!"
    • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cpu6502 (1960974) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:42PM (#39372555)

      Indeed.

      I'd sooner deal with the 1 in 1 billion odds (TSA estimate from the article) that I will step on a plane destined for being blown-up, then the 1-to-1 odds that I or my wife will be sexually assaulted (or Xrayed).

      What's worse is the TSA is extending this BS to train terminals, along highways (border state checkpoints), and post offices, hotels, unemployment/social security centers. Except they call themselves VIPR instead of TSA. What a perfectly Orwellian name! :-|

    • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Totenglocke (1291680) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:58PM (#39373131)
      And it could all be ended in just a few weeks if the masses simply refused to fly. The airlines have been constantly on the verge of bankruptcy for decades and have been bailed out multiple times. If all non-business related air travel stopped suddenly, they'd bleed money so fast that they'd be screaming at the government to get rid of the TSA in no time or else they'd cease to exist. After the outrage over the bank bailouts and bailing out the failed auto industry, only a truly idiotic politician who didn't want to get re-elected would vote to bail out the airlines.
      • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Informative)

        by Grishnakh (216268) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @10:49PM (#39373493)

        Don't be ridiculous.

        For one thing, if people stopped flying as much and the airlines were in financial trouble, the government would bail them out just like they did the auto industry and banks. "Too big to fail", "national importance", etc.

        Secondly, why would a politician be "idiotic" to vote for yet another (no strings) bailout? Who's going to vote against them? Just look at the Obama voters; they're so dumb, they were complaining about Gitmo, the wars, TSA, etc. before Obama was elected, and now that he's continued those policies (or made them worse; the TSA wasn't nearly this bad under Bush), they defend him any time someone criticizes him. Even if Obama isn't re-elected (a very remote possibility at this point it seems), any Republican who gets elected (being Mr. Frothy or Romney, the two front-runners easily) is going to do the exact same thing. The only politicians running who wouldn't do the same thing are Ron Paul, who at this point looks like there's no way he'll get elected (he's lost too many of the primaries so far, though he's doing better than in '08 from what I can tell), and perhaps (I really don't know, since there isn't much info on him) that Richardson guy who's running against Obama on the Democrat ticket but the media hasn't said a single word about.

        The public has spoken, and they're clearly in favor of bailouts, TSA, and wars, on both the Democrat and Republican sides.

        • Re:Thespians (Score:4, Informative)

          by DarkOx (621550) on Friday March 16, 2012 @12:39AM (#39374007) Journal

          Also the airlines have been bailed out before under Bush.

        • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MoldySpore (1280634) on Friday March 16, 2012 @01:00AM (#39374115)

          The public has spoken, and they're clearly in favor of bailouts, TSA, and wars, on both the Democrat and Republican sides.

          There are plenty in the public who do not support these things. The fact is only a tiny fraction of the population actually votes. And this has more to do with votes not really counting for anything more than who the candidates are or what they support. Until they get rid of the electoral college and you get 1 vote for 1 person, and make it easier for people to vote either by having a national holiday on election day or online voting, our "democratic" system is really just smoke and mirrors with 2 parties that support the same political policies. The only differences they have now are philosophical and religious, with the Republicans being on the more crazy, anti-progress side of things, and the Democrats being in the center not willing to more forward. The "party of backwards", and the "party of stationary", respectively.

          Despite everyone's initial glee over Obama, there are few democrats that will defend him breaking his promise to close Gitmo, nor do they support the TSA (though they will support him in the coming election because...honestly...have you seen these republican candidates? Even Ron Paul is pretty crazy and he is the most sane out of all of them, which is saying a lot). I have many, many conversations, with a wide variety of people, and only the most hardcore Republicans support the TSA and GitMo anymore, and even then whenever they fly they bitch about TSA. So it is kind of bullshit anyway, they just regurgitate the same FOX News Republican talking points as the current array of idiots up for the Republican nomination. They don't actually know what they are talking about, and are usually voting against their own personal interests.

          In actuality, the outcry over the TSA especially has been huge, it's just that there is nothing for anyone to do about it. The most anyone can do is boycott flying and just stop taking airplanes to travel. But for some this is just not a possibility. They are a 3 letter government agency put in place and kept in place across both political parties since almost the turn of the century. Americans are lazy. Our political process has become one that encourages laziness because for someone to make ANY kind of difference, even to get people talking about a topic, it requires way more effort than just showing up on election day or taking part in a protest. Occupy Wallstreet barely accomplished getting the nation talking about the wealth inequality, and we basically had to sacrifice our right to public assembly and protest to get that to happen, since most of OWS has been broken up or arrested now under orders from state or local government officials (both republican AND democrats).

          Saying the "public has spoken" and that they are FOR the things you mentioned is not accurate. It would be better to say "The public has spoken, but nobody is listening, so they've all but given up". There is a huge difference between support, and being voiceless. Unless there are changes in the way our political system works and the way the citizens are able to interact with it, nothing will change and the trends we've seen with Gitmo and TSA are only the beginning.

          • Re:Thespians (Score:4, Insightful)

            by rolfwind (528248) on Friday March 16, 2012 @06:07AM (#39375249)

            There are plenty in the public who do not support these things. The fact is only a tiny fraction of the population actually votes. And this has more to do with votes not really counting for anything more than who the candidates are or what they support. Until they get rid of the electoral college and you get 1 vote for 1 person, and make it easier for people to vote either by having a national holiday on election day or online voting, our "democratic" system is really just smoke and mirrors with 2 parties that support the same political policies.

            I'm going to disagree here about the electoral college. It's not really working the way it was designed (us electing representatives that somewhat independently decide who'll the best president will be, hasn't been that way since the 2nd president where they gave him a VP of the opposite party) but it's still protecting us from voter fraud. You see, the US census every 10 years determines how many electors each state gets to send - more population, more electors. Well, anybody who has ever covered US elections probably knows we probably have one of the most in the 1st world on the local and state levels with massive hijinx every election. Just look up the Republican primaries this time around and read about all the irregularities. BUT, the electoral college at least acts as a firewall; no state can send more electors than it has no matter what so the problem is a bit more contained. In a straight up popular vote, really big states who have 1,000,000 dead voters going to the polls will change the outcome much more often than in the electoral game and they'll be extra incentive to do so.

            Adding more democracy has been always a time honored cry to make things better but has it? In 1913, the 17th amendment got adopted. It also added more democracy, it was the mandatory direct election of Senators by the people of their states rather than the states making their own rules, including often appointment by the state congress or governor. In effect, we got two houses of representatives rather than 1 and a house representing state's interests.

            And what has this change landed us?
            http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/debt_deficit_brief.php [usgovernmentspending.com]

            Perpetual wars and massive debt to gdp. Now, I'm not saying the 17th is responsible for all that, 1913 has indeed landed a host of changes to make things more "democratic" like income tax promised to only be applied to the top 0.01% super rich since tariffs were reportedly burdening the common man as well as the Federal Reserve.

            But what I'm definitely saying is that tweak the systems as much as you want, when you have, in the words of George Carlin "If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public."

            Go look at other countries, practically the whole western world and all 1st world countries are as deep in debt as us. Europe and Japan with their multi party Parliaments and whatever, tweaks, tweaks, tweaks didn't do a damn thing. We're just human and that's the problem with the assumptions. Collectively we just suck no matter what we tell ourselves about it being the fault of our systems instead. The only thing a system can do is minimize it for a (relatively) short time until it's bypassed one way or another.

        • Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 16, 2012 @01:27AM (#39374207)

          Just look at the Obama voters; they're so dumb, they were complaining about Gitmo, the wars, TSA, etc. before Obama was elected, and now that he's continued those policies (or made them worse; the TSA wasn't nearly this bad under Bush), they defend him any time someone criticizes him.

          Err, what? Obama voter here -- and I certainly plan to vote for him again.

          I do hate Gitmo. And the wars. And the TSA. And bailouts (although you do know the first ~trillion dollars of bailouts in 2008 were done by Bush, right?).

          You know what else I hated? I hated don't-ask-don't-tell. I hated unnecessary restrictions on stem cell research. I hated medical insurance companies not disclosing what percentage of premiums went to actual medical care. I hated lifetime medical insurance maximums that meant my employed, fully covered neighbor who got breast cancer at 35 would be dropped from her plan before treatment was over, and I hated the pre-existing condition discrimination that would have kept her from ever having medical insurance again. I hated that same-sex partners of federal employees weren't eligible for spousal benefits. I hated the lack of financial reporting requirements that allowed enormous companies to get themselves into the "I need a bailout" position in the first place.

          So I'm now dumb for voting Obama because he only did ten times as much toward fixing the gripes I had/have as any other candidate in 2008 or 2012 would? That doesn't hold water. You're full of shit.

          Also, I realize it's fashionable to claim that Democrat and Republicans are the same. They're not. That's bullshit. They may both fail similarly in some significant areas (e.g. the TSA), but the Republican party has devolved into thinly veiled bigotry, xenophobia, and crony capitalism.

  • Great! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Black Parrot (19622) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:19PM (#39372279)

    Now only terrorists who can afford the $100 can take a bomb on your plane.

    • Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Vinegar Joe (998110) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:20PM (#39372289)

      I doubt the Saudis who did 9/11 would have had too much trouble raising $100.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ehiris (214677)

      As if this security is really to prevent terrorists and not to make a bunch of cowardly sheep feel better about flying.

      • Re:Great! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:35PM (#39372467) Journal
        Even better! Now the somewhere-just-above-middle-of-bottom sheep get to feel more important than the sheep who weren't invited to enjoy shorter lines in Citizen+ class!

        Nothing destroys somebody's motivation to deal with the torrent of shit flowing down the hill quite like the knowledge that there is somebody just a bit further down than he is. With any luck, we will soon be rolling the program out to cover traffic offenses, modest drug possession, and suspicion of tax fraud, making dealing with the justice system easier and more comfortable for the people who count.
    • Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)

      by pushing-robot (1037830) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:29PM (#39372401)

      From TFA:

      Enrolling [in Precheck] requires a $100 application fee for a background check, plus a brief interview with a Customs officer.

      Once in Precheck, TSA still checks names against terrorism watch lists before every flight, just as it does for other travelers. If a passenger is cleared for Precheck screening, a code is embedded in a traveler's boarding pass.

      Precheck members usually get to use security lines set up for first-class and elite-level frequent fliers. But Precheck travelers actually don't know if they will get to use the easy screening until the TSA officer checking IDs actually scans the boarding pass. If the pass has the code, a Precheck passenger is steered to a separate screening lane for what amounts to old-style airport screening.

      TSA says Precheck members are selected randomly for regular screening to enhance security. But that unpredictability irks frequent travelers. The agency doesn't make travelers go to the end of the regular screening line, however, but instead slips them into the front of the regular queue.

      So it's a bit more complicated than waving a Benjamin in front of your friendly TSA employee. Though that probably works, too.

      • Oops, strike that first line. The $100 gets you into the U.S. Customs "Global Entry" program, which also puts you in Precheck.

        There is also the alternative free method "To qualify, frequent fliers must meet undisclosed TSA criteria and get invited in by the airlines."

        So spending a hundred bucks still looks like your best bet.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by stephanruby (542433)

        Precheck members usually get to use security lines set up for first-class and elite-level frequent fliers.

        Are they implying that first-class travelers are already getting this kind of preferential treatment?

        Because the 911 terrorists all had first-class [wikipedia.org] tickets!

        I'm sorry, but as long as first-class passengers have their own sectioned-off area in the front of the plane, near the cockpit area, they should be checked and groped more thoroughly than any of the Economy-class passengers (otherwise, this entire thing is a farce). First class sections rarely have passengers in them, furthermore I very much doubt that t

        • Re:Great! (Score:4, Interesting)

          by maitai (46370) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @10:38PM (#39373403) Homepage

          I fly first class. And I love the fact the lines are shorter (hell, I pay extra almost for that alone). But precheck is a separate lane (at least at McCarran) it's just that VIP/1st class gets you to that lane (it branches off from VIP/1st class). I don't know about other airports though.

          But this article is a trip to me. Last Sunday I flew back (1st class) from Vegas, and of course was using the 1st class lane, but they had me take the Precheck lane for the TSA screening. I had NO idea at all what that lane was and was really wondering why I got singled out to go through it. And until this article pretty much forgot about the whole thing.

          From reading the article, there was no reason at all I should have been in that lane. I don't fly internationally, I've never submitted to a customs screening of any sort and so on (and from the article it's American and Delta flights, I was Alaska).

          TSA is goofy.

      • So it's a bit more complicated than waving a Benjamin in front of your friendly TSA employee.

        "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - Benjamin Franklin

      • Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Solandri (704621) on Friday March 16, 2012 @06:57AM (#39375395)
        I have a Nexus pass (expedited crossing at US/Canada borders), which according TFA also qualifies me for Precheck. I got it when I used to cross the border to work in Canada. I wasn't happy about the requirements, but it was pretty much necessary for me to avoid multi-hour waits at the border lines.

        Getting the pass required disclosing/documenting all my international travel for a certain number of years (don't remember how many), my work and residence history, list of family members, I think a list of my bank accounts, list of vehicles I own/drive, all 10 fingerprints, and a ~20 min interview with a CBP agent. I also traveled by air frequently enough that I got the air travel option, which required adding my iris scans to their central database (at least I assume they're iris scans - they could've been retina scans). The application fee covers the work needed to process all this and (I assume) run their own background check to verify the info you submit.

        In exchange for selling my soul to the government, I got through the border in 5-15 minutes. At the major airports I can skip the regular immigration lines, and take the automated Nexus/Global Entry lanes which typically have no line. You scan your card into a machine, which takes pictures of your eyes and compares to what they have on file, then spits out a card saying you're legit. You then give this card to a Customs agent who typically waves you through. They whole point of the program is to pre-screen you to determine if you're a low-risk traveler, then not have to waste time scrutinizing you as closely every time you cross the border.

        It is ridiculously easy to lose this pass. There were horror stories of people losing it for trivial things like failing to declare to Customs that they had an eaten apple core in a bag they were using for garbage in their car. In theory you're allowed to appeal if you lose it, but nobody had ever heard of an appeal succeeding. And once you lose the pass, you are banned from the program for life.

        So no, it's not as simple as just paying $100. For the typical slashdotter, I think the fingerprint and iris scans would be dissuasive enough.
  • by russotto (537200) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:20PM (#39372287) Journal

    ...but I didn't expect it to be just cash money, and I certainly didn't expect it to be so low.

    • by Black Parrot (19622) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:23PM (#39372333)

      TSA Menu:

      Skip opening suitcase - $10
      Skip opening computer - $10
      Skip taking off shoes - $5
      Skip anal probe - $250
      Skip groping - $500 for hunk or babe; free for everyone else.

    • by siddesu (698447)
      That's not a ticket to freedom, that's an indulgence.
  • by medcalf (68293) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:23PM (#39372329) Homepage
    You could do the same thing, but cheaper. Seriously, how is this fundamentally different from legalized bribery?
  • Wrong summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:23PM (#39372331)

    The TSA's new program, Precheck, is free (right now it's by invitation only though). The $100 is for Global Entry, the program that lets you skip the lines for immigration. If you have Global Entry you automatically get Precheck, but Global Entry is not necessary for Precheck.

    I hate the TSA as much as the next guy (probably more than most since I'm an international student and have to put up with their stupid security theater often), but get your facts straight.

    • by Austerity Empowers (669817) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:28PM (#39372393)

      I don't think I want to request Global Entry from people who take naked pictures of me, or who wear rubber globes and feel me up.

  • by Rone (46994) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:37PM (#39372497)

    The article mentioned a couple things that have profoundly disturbing implications when considered together:

    1) This expedited screening program is by invitation only.

    2) The TSA agents staffing the expedited checkpoints are smiling and extra-friendly.

    So now, air travel has a caste system. VIPs (everybody who might possibly have a chance to successfully reform/dismantle the TSA) get kid glove treatment, and the filthy plebes get the rude assholes who steal stuff from your luggage and molest your children with complete impunity.

    Joy.

    • by Overzeetop (214511) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:25PM (#39372903) Journal

      The caste system has always been in place. Coach/steerage gets the general line. First class gets a special, shorter line (since it's just FC passengers). Private jet passengers have no line, no check.

      This is more of a nod to the frequent fliers who are constantly going through this. I'm of two minds about this: folks who are putting up 200k miles are unlikely to be terrorist bombers, and this addresses part of the "bad for business / lost hours" problem that the TSA creates which I like to harp on. That said, it just makes those of us who fly infrequently madder to see folks breezing through the lines and TSA agents standing around doing nothing while the regular line snakes around the corner.

      As for the smiles - that's just human nature, not some kind of special Disney treatment you get with your pass. Those agents don't have to deal with constantly grousing passengers, people who have lost patience with the lines and required security striptease, and the inevitable idiot who has no idea what their doing (or is intentionally belligerent) and fouls up the works. I'd smile too if everyone who passed through my line was happy about NOT being in that OTHER line.

  • by Registered Coward v2 (447531) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:38PM (#39372507)
    Precheck does not let you "pay $100 and bypass it [TSA security] completely!" All it does is let you leave computers, liquids (within TSA guidelines) etc in your bag and not take off shoes, belts, etc. Your stuff is still x-rayed, you still go through a metal detector; the big advantages you're in a line with people who actually understand the drill and don't screw up the process by bringing in a bottle of water, etc and the line is shorter.

    To do this, you go through a background check and TSA interview, plus pay $100. It's an outgrowth of the SENTRI and Global Entry programs, which let you avoid the long immigration lines when returning to the US. And yes, it's worth every penny if you fly a lot.

  • by neile (139369) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:40PM (#39372525)
    And it's not to the TSA. Another spectacular Slashdot story title and summary.

    People who have already been screened and approved for the Global Entry ($100) or NEXUS ($50) program are automatically eligible for pre-check. The TSA isn't making (or receiving) any money on this. The money is to pay for the background check and screening done to get into the trusted traveler programs run by customs and immigration.

    The TSA is actually being *smart* here. If you've already been checked and interviewed for expedited entry into the country, why *wouldn't* you be trusted for expedited security screening at an airport?

    Neil

    • by dkleinsc (563838)

      No, the TSA is being dumb here. Two major flaws:
      1. You aren't necessarily who your documents say you are. For instance, if you stole somebody's credentials, did a quick photo switcheroo, and created legitimate-looking copies, all of a sudden you've convinced the TSA agent that you're the pre-checked Mr Smith when you are in fact Mr Reid with a bomb in your shoe.

      2. Bad guys don't necessarily do anything that would show up on a background check prior to committing terrorism. A terrorist was almost definitely

  • by Sean_Inconsequential (1883900) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:42PM (#39372549)

    The article makes it seem as though the offer will only be extended to those who, due to flying frequently, are invited to the program by air lines. So really it is for CEOs, celebrities, and politicians that fly frequently to avoid those few run-ins that they have had in the past. Maybe it is just cynicism, but I am feeling like this is just "we are trying to be better" posturing masking an attempt hopefully prevent accidentally groping someone that can use their social position to have their voice easily heard by a large number of people.

    • by awtbfb (586638)

      Actually, the screening is Global Entry, which is also associated with border crossing things like NEXUS and SENTRI. These programs are very popular for people who drive over the US border a lot since they let you go through a faster customs line. For example, NEXUS can shave 20+ minutes off a border crossing in/out of Canada (it works both ways). The time savings can really add up if you drive across the border a lot. Also, the fee is only once every few years.Therefore, people of all classes get NEXUS, SE

  • by Teppy (105859) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:44PM (#39372581) Homepage
    I just need to not have a history of not being a suicide bomber?
  • Are you nervous? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by weave (48069) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:47PM (#39372603) Journal

    I got Global Entry. My interview was touch-and-go. I got grilled pretty heavily and finally the agent said "Why are you nervous? Are you nervous?" and I was like "I wasn't nervous until now" and then he asked "are you on any medication?" I thought for sure I was going to get denied, but I passed.

    We make fun of TSA a lot but they do do a background check on you, the interview is looking for certain tells, and even with the pre-check you never know when you'll go through the expedited line or express. I'm betting the agent that scans the BP can also look for tells and push you through the normal line even if the BP says you can go through the quick one.

    Also, Global Entry really delivers on re-entry into the country, especially if you're sitting up front. I'm in my car 10 minutes after the door opens (I know where to park right outside the arrivals hall, which helps too)

  • by harvey the nerd (582806) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @08:55PM (#39372683)
    Bypass everything in the US touched by the government. Dump the dollars, don't go to the US. Nothing, as it becomes overrun with orwellian BO (Bushie-Obamite statists etc devolving parallel to the UK example) . Hitler and Mussolini could only dream of the coercive powers being developed in the US.
  • by CohibaVancouver (864662) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:40PM (#39372993)
    Here's what I object to about paying for the 'security' card: I'm a 'safe' citizen - No criminal record, no issues etc. So in effect every time I step in front of an officer at security I'm eating up the (expensive) valuable resources of a trained officer who would be better served questioning more 'suspicious' characters.

    If I consented to a check, the governments of the USA and Canada would not have to waste valuable resources asking me questions any more, and would in fact save themselves money. Instead, they charge *me* money for the ability to repurpose their officers. They should be encouraging as many 'safe' citizens as possible to get these cards (for free) so security can be more efficient, and cheaper to operate.

    I object to this non-sensical government tax grab.
  • 1 in a Billion (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Some Guy (21271) on Thursday March 15, 2012 @10:55PM (#39373521) Homepage

    From the article:

        "We can reduce the size of the haystack when we are looking for that one-in-a-billion terrorist," said TSA Administrator John Pistole.

    Wow.

    So if there's 7 Billion people in the world, then... there are only 7 people we need to find. Wow we're wasting a lot of time, money, and resources at the airports.

  • by McGruber (1417641) on Friday March 16, 2012 @12:22AM (#39373927)

    It should read:

    Pay the TSA $100 and Bypass Airport Security Theater

  • by f97tosc (578893) on Friday March 16, 2012 @12:57AM (#39374095)
    Just a clarification. There is an international program called Global Entry, that is $100. You can get invited to the domestic program PreCheck either by being a frequent flier or being part of Global Entry. I am a frequent flier and participated in PreCheck, did not cost me anything. I did not pay $100 to join the Global Entry program. And btw, they still randomize more thorough searches.
  • by ProfBooty (172603) on Friday March 16, 2012 @09:53AM (#39376589)

    Why the heck doesn't anyone who has a CAC/PID, the government's trusted ID card used by civilians, military and contractors have access to these lines? The government already spent plenty of cash doing background checks on these people.

    My card (the standard gov issued one) gets me into the whitehouse (even the west wing) with an escort, with the security screen process being less intrusive than going through an airport. Heck, the west wing doesn't even have any screening. The guard just opens the gate and lets you in.

Do not simplify the design of a program if a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful.

Working...