https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/mobile-passport-contr...
Used it last month coming through SFO and almost no one is in the MPC line compared to 1000+ in the standard lines.
61–70 of 144 posts
https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/mobile-passport-contr...
Used it last month coming through SFO and almost no one is in the MPC line compared to 1000+ in the standard lines.
If it wasn't for this so-called "theatre", I'd have accidentally got on a plane with more than 50ml of toothpaste last week, and I'm sure I don't need to explain the damage that would have caused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We…we did. For 87 years of air travel we did. Went pretty darn good. People seemed to have fun with it. They even looked forward to flights. What an odd comment.
I flew the final 6 years of that period and enjoyed flying. Post-9/11 flying sucks and is a huge drag. If you're too young to have experienced pre-9/11 airports then you really don't know what you're missing. When I was little they let me see the cockpit in flight, and the flight attendants would bring me little snacks on late flights. It was a totally different experience versus being crammed into a flying bus.
Now compare the money your parents paid for your little vacations back then to a flight nowadays.
I insist on a manual opt-out every time I fly, and I've noticed particularly in LAS that TSA seems intentionally to delay that screening process as an extrajudicial punishment and disincentive. It's outrageous and this intentional crippling of manual processes to which passengers are entitled needs to be checked, not expanded.
What TSA needs is proper oversight, better KPIs, and a cultural overhaul to stop treating passengers so terribly. TSA ought to provide an SLA commitment, consistently and openly report on their actual service level, reward managers who improve it, and fire/demote those managers who degrade it.
I don't understand the hate for TSA. Sure, it can be better. But does anyone dare board a plane when none of the passengers have been screened?
If said plane is the only unscreened flight out of Tel-Aviv? Maybe I'd have some reservations. But if all flights were completely unscreened? It wouldn't change what or when I fly. I already board unscreened trains and busses quite often.
You blow up a bus, maybe no one really cares except the locals to the area where the bus blew up.
A plane cuts through many different social classes and nationalities, putting them all in one place and making a large amount of people imagine themselves as the potential victim.
If you're ever wondering why something in the U.S. can't be made better, the answer is often that the existing rent-collectors must be allowed to continue collecting their rent at all costs. This is why we can't have the government file taxes on our behalf: because Intuit would no longer be collecting rent, and rent-collecting must be protected at all costs. This is why we can't have a single-payer healthcare system:…
AKA The Shirky principle, which was discussed in great depth last week
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a detterence factor in play. Terrorists won't try to get through precisely because of the intense security.
If there were terrorists, they would just open fire on the crowded security checkpoints and kill hundreds of people without any complex scheme. This doesn't happen because there is no terrorist threat we need to be on guard against.
Whether the specific airplane controls we have now are effective or required is still a good conversation to have, but you draw the wrong conclusion if you think there is simply no threat.
I'm not convinced the TSA is needed to stop terrorism, but it probably helps a good deal with protecting passengers from ordinary psychotic Americans, of which there seem to be a significant increase over the last 20 or so years.
Ordinary psychotic Americans who get upset at me if I ask if I need to take my computer out and put it in a bin? Not sure it’s doing a good job at that.
I don't understand the hate for TSA. Sure, it can be better. But does anyone dare board a plane when none of the passengers have been screened?
We…we did. For 87 years of air travel we did. Went pretty darn good. People seemed to have fun with it. They even looked forward to flights. What an odd comment.
From 1973 on, hijacking’s dropped considerably. Since 2001 there have been no hijackings in the US.
Your comment is the odd one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there were terrorists, they would just open fire on the crowded security checkpoints and kill hundreds of people without any complex scheme. This doesn't happen because there is no terrorist threat we need to be on guard against.
If it's so obvious, then why didn't this happen on 9/11? Edit: I'm aware that the TSA was created after 9/11. The point I'm making is that it's possible they were able to bring weapons aboard to hijack the planes because security was so lax.