Spiff

It's not transparent. There's no due process for being removed and there's no published criteria for getting on. People can be arbitrarily placed on the list without knowing they're on the list. The government refuses to even tell someone if they're on the list.

In short, it's a disgusting, un-American form of harassment.

joshwex90

Again, that's the implementation. You don't like the TSA and find them un-American. Does that mean we should get rid of airline security or reform it? I vote for the latter and I vote we keep the no-fly list but reform it as well.

Spiff

Reform by returning security to the airlines, I'll accept.

They could then maintain their own lists of customers who have caused problems in the past and can be legally denied transport on a common carrier. The government should be removed from the equation completely.

cynicAAl

First, you assume that by showing your ID, the person checking the ID is cross-referencing your name to the magical No-Fly List. I doubt that's actually happening at every step in the process where you are asked to show ID.

Second, as long as everyone is screened (Bags Xrayed, WTMD, scan, etc), there should be no threat to your security or the security of the plane. Someone on the No-Fly list is just another annoying passenger in your personal space after they've been screened.

GUWonder

The government's no-fly list and passenger watch-lists and use of those blacklists should be scrapped. The blacklists and their use depend upon the idiocy of wasting resources on having security screeners checking IDs instead of using those resources to search for and interdict contraband WEIs.

Interdiction of contraband WEI is impeded when the government is using (read: wasting) resources obsessing over passenger ID and passenger blacklists.

The government's passenger blacklisting and passenger ID-checking obsessions don't improve security -- they increases the risk of security failure. This is not an implementation failure, as the concept itself is rotten at root.

As long as all passengers have been effectively screened for WEIs, they all could use Banana Republic souvenir passports or DLs for ID and I would be no less secure on my flight.

GaryD

Interesting, and nice.

A step in the right direction, finally?

Airbridge

Who cares? your Identity has nothing to do with security

Good - TSA are a big enough pain in a$$ in the USA without them expanding to foreign soil

WillCAD

From a customs and immigration standpoint, I think it's probably a UA issue if they board someone without verifying that they have a valid passport, because it's my understanding that anyone without a valid passport will likely be denied entry to pretty much any country in the world, leaving UA with the problem of returning the person to their country of origin.

Yes, really.

So long as you and your luggage are screened properly to be sure you're not carrying weapons or explosives, it doesn't matter who you are, it's safe to allow you aboard an airplane.

Again, that's a UA problem, not a security problem. If UA boards a passenger who is illegally using someone else's ticket, they're the ones who are losing revenue. But even for revenue protection, an ID check has limited value, since a ticket thief could be using a fake ID.

Just because you have a multipass that says you're Corbin Dallas doesn't mean you're actually THE Corbin Dallas.

Of course, if more than one person shows up claiming to be Corbin Dallas, the proper procedure, IMHO, would be to pull all of the Corbin Dallases aside and determine which is the genuine article, and which are imposters illegally in possession of fraudulent ID documents. At that point it becomes a criminal issue involving the police.

But if only ONE Corbin Dallas shows up to check in for the flight, then it's not such a big deal if his ID isn't checked prior to boarding, as long as he and his luggage are properly screened for weapons and explosives.

So what? The only potential negative to that is that UA may have allowed a non-paying passenger to board under someone else's ticket.

In short, I believe this is a legitimate issue for the airlines, to prevent stow-aways, illicit ticket transfers, and potential international admission refusals. But it's not a security issue at all.

TheRoadie

If the government has probable cause to put somebody on a no-fly list so they won't attend a terrorist convention, they should be indicted and arrested. If the government fails to have evidence to that standard, there's no reason to restrict the person's movements. What are they going to attack the aircraft with? Evil Thoughts?