Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 267 posts

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#201

Post by jcranmer »

orblivion wrote: post #65
mikeash wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of an "at your own risk" option, but it'll never happen. Since 9/11, a large part of the purpose of airport security is to protect uninvolved people on the ground (or at least in tall buildings), not just passengers. We can certainly debate whether that's necessary or useful (I'd argue that we could do far less than we currently do), but I don't think you'll ever get the public to agree to allowing ai…

To protect those on the ground, part of the option could be acknowledging that the military can take out your plane if it's hijacked.

Look at the timeline of the 9/11 attacks:" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_for_the_day_of_the_Se....

Flight 11 was crashed 30 minutes after hijacking, 175 20 minutes, 77 about 45 minutes, and 93 about 35 minutes later. Even if you tighten the loop between a hijacking and getting a fighter jet in the air to counter it, it will still take you about 15 minutes at best to do it.

Then you're left with the problem of figuring out which one of the contacts on your military radar doesn't have a transponder. Go to a map like " rel="nofollow">https://flightaware.com/live/> and observe the Ohio/Pennsylvania airspace in the middle of the day. You have 15 minutes to figure out the hijacked flight, guess its flight path, and then order fighters to intercept it and shoot it down.

Quite frankly, if a plane gets hijacked in the Northeast, there is no way you can get a military jet to shoot it down in time.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#202

Post by awinter-py »

Love that they're quoting bruce schneier in defense. I think he was just being fair-minded because he doesn't want to appear smug. This is a guy who walked through the screening with a 'beer belly' (beer smuggling device for stadiums) full of gasoline and then blogged about it.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#203

Post by mikeash »

lftl wrote: post #160
mikeash wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of an "at your own risk" option, but it'll never happen. Since 9/11, a large part of the purpose of airport security is to protect uninvolved people on the ground (or at least in tall buildings), not just passengers. We can certainly debate whether that's necessary or useful (I'd argue that we could do far less than we currently do), but I don't think you'll ever get the public to agree to allowing ai…

a large part of the purpose of airport security is to protect uninvolved people on the ground This was solved when they locked the cockpit doors. Every other airport security restriction has been an overreaction in my opinion.

I think you may be right. However, you'd have to convince the public (or at least Congress) before you could have "security free" flights even with secure cockpits.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#204

Post by Broken_Hippo »

douche wrote: post #194
a3n wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the person in the Pre line got to keep their shoes on!

In no other country that I have flown from did I have to take off my shoes to go through security. Although on my last flight I did learn that Nutella is a liquid. Maybe I should have frozen it?

I flew last November, from Trondheim (Norway) to Amsterdam, round trip. Both times I had to take my shoes off. But the rest of the screening process is much quicker, and the lines aren't as long. I even got extra searching when I arrived back home and it was quicker than the waits in the US - and that dude went through all of my stuff. I happily travel lightly, but still not bad at all.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#205

Post by switch007 »

mattmanser wrote: post #200
douche wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In no other country that I have flown from did I have to take off my shoes to go through security. Although on my last flight I did learn that Nutella is a liquid. Maybe I should have frozen it?

We used to have to in the UK for a while.

It still happens. I always seem to get asked.

Heathrow's FAQ: "Do I need to remove my shoes at security? Only if you’re asked. Some passengers will be asked to remove shoes in order for them to be x-rayed."

Gatwick's FAQ: "You may be asked to remove your shoes and belt before going through the security archway."

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#206

Post by dragontamer »

alanwatts wrote: post #188
dragontamer wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 3. Profit! The Department of Homeland Security (of which the TSA is a part of) has a budget and its priorities are set in Congress. There is no "profit" motive here. The US is throwing money at this problem, and money that only creates inconveniences for us.

The 2nd US Secretary of Homeland Security and co-author of the Patriot Act is the founder of a lobbying front for the the manufacturers of the body scanners. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chertoff

I'm still not seeing how registering for pre-check benefits this guy.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#207

Post by ethbro »

kyleblarson wrote: post #174
cloudjacker wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I arrive at the airport in a Lyft. I walk up to the security checkpoint checkpoint, where I show the agent my phone. They see my boarding pass with the green checkmark and send me to the empty TSA Pre line. I walk through the metal detector with no adjustments to my attire. I am at the gate in 5 minutes. I like how trains basically let you show up last minute, and a 3 hour train ride actually means a 3 hour train rid…

The easiest way for the government to acquire biometrics on every citizen is to make non pre-check so painful that people willingly go the pre-check route. What's next? Don't want to wait 5 hours at the DMV for a license? Just let us inject this little tracking chip in your neck.

Good news, everyone! TSA and DMV lines now reduced for owners of Amazon Echo or Google Home! Because {REDACTED}

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#208

Post by marssaxman »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #102
cloudjacker wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I arrive at the airport in a Lyft. I walk up to the security checkpoint checkpoint, where I show the agent my phone. They see my boarding pass with the green checkmark and send me to the empty TSA Pre line. I walk through the metal detector with no adjustments to my attire. I am at the gate in 5 minutes. I like how trains basically let you show up last minute, and a 3 hour train ride actually means a 3 hour train rid…

Agree. My $100 Global Entry (includes TSA Pre) fee is my hedge against the American public's apathy towards the TSA.

Instead of paying to get my rights back, I make a point of calling the TSA's bluff. I always refuse the pornoscanner and wait for the in-person pat down. If more people did this, the system would collapse, because - last time I shuffled through some back-of-the-envelope calculations, anyway - even the TSA's monstrously bloated budget comes nowhere close to the cost of hiring enough screeners to pat everyone down individually.

Of course they'd just change their already-arbitrary rules and force us all through the X-ray machines anyway, if we started refusing to use them en masse; but that'd create its own kind of legal push-back, and hopefully something good would come of the resulting mess. In any case, I'm not putting up with their nonsense while there is some means left I can use to resist it.

And I always fly in a kilt, regimental-style. TSA training has improved over the years, but the handful of times I managed to utterly flummox a TSA screener, suddenly confronted with a man wearing a "skirt," went a long way toward making me feel better about the humiliation of the whole exercise.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#209

Post by mindslight »

jasonjei wrote: post #186
saryant wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airports can replace the TSA with private contracts. SFO farmed security out to a company called Covenant. They still have to follow TSA policies and aren't necessarily an improvement from a passenger standpoint. I.e., you're still getting yelled at by otherwise-unemployable nitwits on a power trip.

I've actually found the SFO private contractors to be fantastic. I once left my laptop at the security scanner, and they shipped it to me next day (at my expense) where I urgently needed my laptop the following day--it was boxed and packaged nicely and sent to FedEx for me for free. I just had to send them a PDF label. They simply verified serial number. They had a great lost and found tracking system and called me "…

So you were forcibly separated from your laptop, yet are thankful that you only had to pay for overnight shipping to get it back?

Stockholm syndrome indeed.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#210

Post by [deleted] »

fluxquanta wrote: post #175
jonnathanson wrote: post #89

The article is exactly right about what needs to be done, and who needs to do it: the airports themselves. No chance any elected official is going to scale back the TSA's screening creep at this point. The political risks of looking "soft on terrorism" are just too high. Imagine being a politician responsible for a TSA rollback, and then, by dumb luck, a terrorist attack succeeds a short while later. There may be zer…

>This is why it's in the hands of airports to push for any particular change. They're not running for office. They rely on federal funding for new infrastructure, which brings more air traffic, which brings more gate fees, which results in more money for those running the airport.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN