Live data from Hacker News

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

vox.com

261–267 of 267 posts

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

#261
post #144

I hate security, though I hate the discomfort of air travel even more. In fact, I just got back to the US from Europe, and the cold that struck 12h after I left lasted 7-10 days (and I rarely get sick!) That said, am I the only one who doesn't have these long security waits? I typically show up at the airport ~1h before boarding is to begin, and am often at my gate 50min before boarding begins. I typically fly out of…

You've gotten lucky. Recently I got to the airport early (unusual for me) a 2 hour wait in line later, we missed our flight (by about 15 minutes) As we were getting placed on the next flight the agent said lately 2 hours wasn't long enough. I flew out of the same airport about a month later, and an hour earlier in the day and had no issues. Doesn't mean there isn't an issue with TSA. Why should we have to wait at all? Why should we be treated like criminals?

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

#262
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's hard to propose a workable alternative No, actually, it's really easy. > You need some security. That was clear before 9-11. No, it was not clear then, and it is not clear now. There are two salient facts: 1. When tested, the TSA misses 90% or so of the weapons people try to smuggle past them 2. Notwithstanding #1, there have been zero successful terrorist attack on aircraft in the U.S. since 9-11. So it is fa…

> 2. Notwithstanding #1, there have been zero successful terrorist attack on aircraft in the U.S. since 9-11. How much is due to the TSA, as opposed to civilian and military intelligence work at home and abroad and simple measures such as having air marshals and preventing any access to the cockpit during flight?

>> 2. Notwithstanding #1, there have been zero successful terrorist attack on aircraft in the U.S. since 9-11.

>How much is due to the TSA

I would say a large part of it is because a 9/11 style attack just wouldn't work anymore. 9/11 worked only because the passengers were thinking "hijacking", where there was some chance to live.

Once the passengers understand the consequences (as with United 93), they will fight back.

That totally changes the risk/reward profile for terrorists. Your chances of taking down the plane are lower, and your chances of aiming it at a high value target are almost nil.

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

#263
post #234
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely because the TSA issue is something they expect to see infecting the train transport system if it existed and that the car is figuratively and literally a symbol of freedom and the ability to escape the rules of others in the American culture. (Source: I live here.)

Interesting. To me the car is the least free method of transport. I feel like I'm in jail. There are thousands of rules, stay between the lines, listen to all the signs, careful to not hit children, it's so much more stressful than smoking a joint, sitting in a train and reading a book (my preferred way to get around).

>careful to not hit children

What are the rules on trains?

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

#264
I've had TSA agents look through my wallet, and on a separate flight look through playing cards one by one. I was also let through with no screening once by accident.

I've seen them yell at passengers, drift off, sit around talking with long lines waiting, and every other conceivable offense. Most are fine but there are a lot of exceptions.

They contribute nothing, and I for one fly less frequently because of them.

As to pre-check: at Atlanta that doesn't always get you a short line or fast security wait time.

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

#265

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.

Over a long enough time frame, all bureaucracies become institutions whose only goal is the continued growth and accumulation of resources ( to be used for the continued growth of the bureaucracy itself), not for the original purpose of the bureaucracy.

Yup. Be it government or business, no difference there. Of course, in both cases a cleanup is possible- and occasionally happens. But then you need a proper market for business or a working democracy for government and those are frequently missing.

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

#266
It is so frustrating to see a lot of the “solutions” being proposed by the administration: wanting to hire more screeners, blaming passengers for bringing too many pesky bottles of water and pocket knives, etc. They are missing the obvious solution that should be at the top of the list, right in front of their faces: we must REMOVE “safeguards” to speed things up.

The probability that a bottle of water or anything that looks like water will cause an airline disaster is effectively ZERO. It is not a risk, and not even slightly concerning, period. This is not worth checking even once, even at random, much less millions of times a day.

And pocket knives? They SERVE FOOD WITH KNIVES on planes. They literally give you a knife in first class. If it was someone’s goal to obtain a knife on board, they would not need to bring it through security. And frankly, one could argue that knives are the opposite of risky: a few passengers with knives to defend themselves may very well be able to prevent a handful of hijackers from doing anything. Either way, I am strongly on the side of “teach people to band together and defend themselves”, not “cower and be fearful of everything”.

And don’t even get me started on having to take off shoes. It is frankly sad that we have been so fixated on ONE piece of clothing, for years and years and years, as a reaction to ONE passenger out of millions who couldn’t even carry out his “threat” successfully.

Besides, the entire concept of “prohibited items” does not eliminate risk. There are human beings who are powerful enough and skilled enough to cause serious damage or death all by themselves. They don’t need “prohibited items”, they simply are deadly. A group of passengers that knows how to band together and fight back can subdue anyone, even a passenger that is deadly all by himself.

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

#267
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it abstracts security to something that can be done in the weeks before your flight, instead of vetting a person in the hour and a half beforehand.

Most travelers are repeat travelers. Exactly what vetting is being done for Pre that can't be done once in person that sticks with the person for 1-2 years and is renewable in a similar way as Pre?

Sorry for the slow response. Just found this comment.

The first and most obvious response is that tsa-pre requires your fingerprints, and tsa does not. That obviously leads to an amount of pre-vetting that is never capable of being done in tsa.

In addition to this, I'd compare tsa to a blacklist and tsa-pre to a whitelist. Perhaps if your estranged ex-wife's crazy uncle goes to the same bar as a known terrorist suspect then tsa would prefer you go through the additional screening (and thus deny you to tsa-pre). However, the connection to the uncle is only made once you apply to tsa-pre (as its a whitelist), and thus more vetting is done.

Post reply on HN