Pay the TSA $100 and Bypass Airport Security 527
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!"
Worth every penny. (Score:4, Funny)
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.
Re:Assholes on every flight (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Assholes on every flight (Score:5, Informative)
The US airlines created this problem. By charging ridiculous baggage fees, they are practically forcing you to carry-on everything but the kitchen sink.
Luckily in Europe, baggage fees are mostly an exception (oversize and extra pieces over the normal limit, excess weight, etc) and this problem does not exist. Even when I fly to/from the US on a codeshare flight booked on a European carrier, I don't have to pay the baggage fees even if some segments are on US carriers.
Re:Assholes on every flight (Score:5, Insightful)
They should really do quite the opposite, charge people for carry-ons, and checked baggage is free.
It would speed up the security checkpoints.
It would speed up boarding.
It would give everyone who actually needs to carry on baggage (people with medicine, kids, etc.) a much easier time finding space close to their seat.
Re:Assholes on every flight (Score:5, Informative)
Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Funny)
"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)
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Funny)
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)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why old people rock! At least that kind of old people!
Re: (Score:3)
I'm under 40, I get in the face of cops when I need to (most of the time I don't), then again, I don't live in a totalitarian state run by the highest bidder.
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Informative)
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)
Also the airlines have been bailed out before under Bush.
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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)
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.
Re:Thespians (Score:4, Funny)
I usually describe the Democrats as being useless and the Republicans as being evil.
Re:Thespians (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't vote for the lesser evil you'll get the bigger evil, though. (You want a Santorum supreme court?) And if you can't even be bothered to vote, you sure as hell won't fight back.
Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now only terrorists who can afford the $100 can take a bomb on your plane.
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
I doubt the Saudis who did 9/11 would have had too much trouble raising $100.
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
No no no you mean those terrorists from Iraq, er, Iran.
We've always been friends with Iraq... (Score:5, Informative)
and always been at war with Iran. The ministry of truth keeps all the old newspapers updated so that I can verify that fact.
Did you hear that the chocolate rations are going up again?
Re:We've always been friends with Iraq... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great! (Score:4, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Depends, are we in Uganda?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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)
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:4, Interesting)
It's a simple concept, called "Divide and Conquer."
Simply create many classes of privilege to discourage collective action. This technique has worked very well for many years.
Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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:Great! (Score:5, Funny)
Global Entry *and* Precheck? This is a fantastic 2-for-1 deal! Now, when I'm flying into the US to bomb a domestic flight, I don't have to wait in line at customs, I can just hail a cab and I'm off to Home Depot for box cutters and fertilizer. America sure is the land of convenience!
Re:Great! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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)
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.
Benjamin Franklin (Score:3)
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - Benjamin Franklin
Re:Great! (Score:5, Informative)
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.
I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:5, Funny)
...but I didn't expect it to be just cash money, and I certainly didn't expect it to be so low.
Re:I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:5, Funny)
And yet I get strange looks when I use my CCW permit as my "government issued picture ID"
Fingerprints, FBI background check, etc.
"government issued picture ID" (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's see ... I've had rejected:
The problem was that the first three of 'em were at the same time. It went down something like this: (I show my agency badge). "You need to show a government issued ID." "It was issued by NASA". "I can't accept that." "They let me fly here showing this" "I can't accept it, you need to show other ID" (I show my student ID). "We don't accept student ID cards". "It was issued by the University of Maryland, which is under the state government, so it's a government issued ID". "No, we don't take student ID cards, I need to see something else". (I pull out my military dependant ID). "I have this, but it's expired." (he writes 'no ID' on the boarding pass, and sends me for a pat down).
Note ... he never asked for a driver's license, which yes, I had on me. He just kept repeating 'government ID', but then kept rejecting them when I showed them.
Now technically the first one didn't comply with the full requirements, because it didn't have my height or eye color on it, but I used it for years without problems (it didn't have any identifying information other than a last name and a picture, but it was a hell of a lot more functional than the current one, as it had in HUGE text what the damned expiration on it was).
The sad one was when I got rejected because I gave my new 'unified' government ID. The guy's not rejecting it, he's just turning it over in his hands, looking at both sides ... spent a minute or two looking, finally, I asked him if there was a problem, and he replied "I've never seen one of these before", to which I replied, "You're wearing one". "I mean a NASA one" "It's the same as yours, but it says NASA on it" "Do you have some other ID on you?" (I then pulled out my driver's license, as I didn't have the others on me).
... and the really sad thing ... back in high school (before 2001), I worked summers for a DoD office that was across the street from the Pentagon. One day, I was making the mail run, and realized I didn't have my wallet, which had my military dependant ID, which was my normal picture ID, as the summer badge didn't have a picture on it. I dug through my bag, and managed to find a Photon (sort of like laser tag) ID -- a hand-filed out crappily laminated card, but it had my name and a picture ... and the guard let me in (without even going through the metal detector, as I had the summer badge)
Re:"government issued picture ID" (Score:4, Insightful)
it had in HUGE text what the damned expiration on it was
What happens when your ID expires? Do you turn into someone else?
Re: (Score:3)
So all it costs a terrorist organization is $100 apiece to determine if their suicide bombers are going to be able to carry a bomb on the plane or not?
Inconceivable!
Re:I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just a guess, but they're probably not entirely different than the requirements for a TWIC Card [tsa.gov], also issued by the TSA to gain access to secure areas such as maritime ports, refineries, and other "sensitive" locations.
I do have a TWIC card. It's always interesting (scary?) when I present the federal credential to a TSA agent at an airport. Although the TWIC card provides no access to airport facilities, it is a valid form of government ID issued by the TSA, Most agents are familiar with it, but one agent, after checking my boarding pass and waving me on asked me "what is this TWIC thing, anyway?"
Security theater!
Re: (Score:3)
You can get some idea from the articles [wcjb.com] about it :
"TSA "Pre-Check" is now available for passengers who submit fingerprints and background checks in advance."
Yep American idiots railing on about how they don't have ID cards because they're a free country "papers please, lolz." All the while their government is creating a biometric database by filtering people through the airports. It started with fingerprinting foreigners as they come into the US, now it's the Americans turn. I've said it before here and I'l
Re: (Score:3)
So the US president wouldn't qualify? Interesting
Not that it matters... since he has his own private aircraft anyways, but I'm just sayin'.
Re:I knew freedom had a price.... (Score:5, Funny)
If they're brown pat them down, if they're black send them back. That's just standard TSA protocol.
Well, if you were in the Third World (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well, if you were in the Third World (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, for mod points today...
Wrong summary (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Wrong summary (Score:4, Funny)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
No, that's not the fact at all if you RTFA. You just get to go in a different line that has an expedited process (ie. it's back to the normal, sane level of security checks that existed before 9/11).
Everyone still goes through the security check, some people just get treated a lot better than others - like the Congressman who in 2004 literally tried to walk through with a loaded gun in his briefcase, and was "detained briefly" and given a plea bargain with no jail time. If it were anyone else they'd still
Something people may not have caught... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Something people may not have caught... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Once again /.'s summary deviates from reality. (Score:5, Informative)
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.
You only have to pay $50 (Score:4, Informative)
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
Re: (Score:3)
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
For the people that matter. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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
So how do I qualify? (Score:5, Funny)
Are you nervous? (Score:4, Interesting)
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)
simpler and cheaper (Score:3, Insightful)
Why it should be free... (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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.
Headline was cut-off (Score:3)
It should read:
Pay the TSA $100 and Bypass Airport Security Theater
No $100 needed domestically for frequent fliers (Score:3)
CAC/PIV and clearance holders (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Informative)
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah- you have be able to order pizza (and read the ad on the box) or pump gas (and read the ad on the pump).
Yes- the TSA hires from ads on Pizza boxes and gas pumps.
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=97&sid=2000678 [federalnewsradio.com]
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Insightful)
> Yes- the TSA hires from ads on Pizza boxes and gas pumps.
That explains a great deal.
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah- you have be able to order pizza (and read the ad on the box) or pump gas (and read the ad on the pump).
I think I've seen those ads on matchbook covers too - "Can you draw this clown? You might qualify to become a TSA Agent!"
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Insightful)
And just like an Airline Employee Global Entry allows you access to crew lines at customs and immigration. Given the amount of time the interview process takes it's not worth the money or hassle for someone that doesn't travel much. But if you travel several times a year it's a big plus... well until too many people enroll.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How exactly is it a rigorous background check for only $100? Before hiring employees, most large financial services firms spend thousands on background checks. In fact it cost an old company I worked at nearly $20k to anal probe, urine test, and strip search me when they went to hire me.
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Funny)
so... you enjoy the probing...
"it still beats dealing with the airlines"
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Funny)
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Interesting)
You work for the airline. It's expected as part of your employment. Freedom of travel is a protected liberty. All air travelers have to be treated equally since the government forces certain security checks before flying. That is fine. What is happening now is that there is discrimination based on wealth and probably nationality (you know who will NEVER get a prescreening invite). The government cannot do either; it's illegal and in violation of equal protection laws. Wealth discrimination by private companies (i.e. airlines offering first class services) is not illegal, but it is for the government.
Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not exactly like that, and it's not exactly new. First you have to pass a rigorous background check, the same one I passed to work for an airline.
Yeah, exactly, you have a pass a rigorous background check that will ensure that under no circumstances can you be bribed or threatened into bringing a bomb onto a plane by threatening or giving a pile of money to your family. First rule of security. Treat all people the same. Anyone getting special treatment is a huge liability.
Re:Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Flawed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Flawed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Interesting)
Still too many points of weakness. What's to stop someone from stealing a passport and going through the low-security line as them?
Re: (Score:3)
First you have to pass a rigorous background check
Yeah I wonder how rigorous a $100 background check is going to be.
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Funny)
so.. what's the rigorous background check? that you haven't been convicted of terrorism before?
They check whether you've ever been a suicide bomber before.
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless... oh dear... don't tell me they ever actually thought they were making us safer. I mean, I know the gate jockeys who feel you up or bark at you to stand still while they look through your clothes are actually convinced they're standing between terrorists and our safety, but I guess I just assumed that the guys at the top, the ones who completed high school, were smart enough to realize they were scamming us.
Re:Sorry... mathematics nazi. (Score:5, Informative)
I think you have a misunderstanding of the context. Sure, there are more than 7 terrorists in the world. But the air transport industry handles 2.75 billion customers each year. Of those 2.75 billion per year, if only 2-3 are terrorists looking to actively carry out an act of terrorism in the air, then he is correct.
Re:Sorry... mathematics nazi. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not anyone. A lot of us have understood how stupid they are from the get go.
Re:Sorry... mathematics nazi. (Score:5, Interesting)
I haven't seen a terrorist since 9/11. Have you?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That just shows the Patriot Act and the TSA are working! If you ignore the fact that correlation doesn't equal causation, that we've improved cockpit security, and that citizens are now more aware of the dangers of hijackings, of course.
Re: (Score:3)
They do do a thorough background check. It's not like $100 just puts you in the VIP TSA lane and for some reason the VIP TSA lane has less checks (it don't). You're $100 pays for the application to have a background check. And at some airports the VIP/1st class lane gets you to the prechecked lane (would you expect less?)