ILovetheReds

That's what I did. I have an M-4 offense from 1986 that I received probation for and have been clean since and have heard mixed things. I only travel international two times a years and with the automated kiosks clearing security isn't that big of a deal anymore.

There's a lot more places to do the fingerprinting at for Precheck than for GE and no real interview. All I had to do was get fingerprinted (place I went to was the same place that does commercial truck driver exams but now you can do it at most major airports) and answer a couple questions on a screen (I believe it was just stating I wasn't convicted of any of the crimes on the site which I also answered yet to online) and had the TTN in a couple days and have been 100 percent for precheck since.

IMO if someone has been convicted of the most of the crimes that get you denied, they should be on a do not fly list.

Dubai Stu

Really? There are a number of people who shouldn't be "trusted travelers" but are fine flyers. It is not that simple.

Let's talk about two former 1960s radicals (convicted felons) who are now respected academics. Professor Angela Davis is a 71 year old professor emeritus from U Cal Davis. In the 1960s, she was a leader in the Black Panther movement. She was tried an acquitted for aiding and abetting the murder of a California police officer in a highly publicized case where she represented herself. In her career, she want on to face other charges (not sure of the results), was the leading Marxist intellectual in the United States, recipient of the Lenin Order of Peace from the former Soviet Union, good friends with Fidel Castro, photo buddy with East Germany's Erich Honnecker, and more. She has also been a leading academic, received thousands of awards and highly respected in her field.

Now lets talk about Northwestern University law professor Bernadine Dohrn. She is a founding member of the Weatherman movement which was the violent arm of Students for a Democratic Society. The Weatherman carried out a campaign of bombing incidents in the late 1960s and early 1970s. They targeted property and tried to avoid physical injury but were not always completely successful. Under her leadership, the Weatherman bombed the US Capitol building, several major New York City train stations, and more. She signed a declaration of war against the United States and was on the FBIs ten most wanted list for three years. She was also a distinguished speaker in Havana in 1969 for the 10th anniversary of the Cuban revolution. In 1972, she publicly spoke out in favor of Charles Manson. The litigation history on her convictions and appellate reversals is complicated and I'm not sure if she still has a record. I don't think so. She did fail the moral character test for the Illinois bar, but many have said that this was because she wouldn't apologize for criminal conduct.

In later years, she went to work for a prestigious, became a leader of international civil rights groups, became a distinguished professor of law at Northwestern, and more. Her husband's friendship with Michelle Obama was negatively mentioned by Governor Palin in her failed VP run.

Would you think either of these people should be given Global Entry status? Do you think their forty year old conduct should still keep them from flying? I think that is a totally different question.

Red259

Do I think they should be kept from flying? Nope. Do I think they should be given Global Entry? Nope.

Dubai Stu

My pointy exactly. I was responding to the guy who said that people who committed the most serious offenses should be on the do not fly list. I was saying 'it ain't that simple.'

RandomBaritone

Exactly right. People forget what GE is. It has nothing to do with security per se; rather, it's an attempt to identify travelers with the lowest propensity to evade customs laws. One side-effect of locating these trustworthy people is that they're vanishingly unlikely to be security risks, so they can also be trusted with Pre-Check. But that's not why GE exists.

(Of course it's easy to forget that the general public are, statistically speaking, also vanishingly unlikely to be security risks ... we're talking about degrees of infinitesimal risk, I suppose.)

Sadly, this is all immaterial to me, since my spouse and I were both denied GE despite never having had a single brush with the law or customs in any country. Heck, my husband is a minister and former federal employee who passed a background check.

We're extreme outliers, I suppose. That's always fun.

ILovetheReds

Here is what will get you disqualified from precheck:

•Espionage or conspiracy to commit espionage.
•Sedition or conspiracy to commit sedition.
•Treason or conspiracy to commit treason.
•A federal crime of terrorism as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2332b(g), or comparable State law, or conspiracy to commit such crime.
•A crime involving a TSI (transportation security incident). Note: A transportation security incident is a security incident resulting in a significant loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system disruption, or economic disruption in a particular area, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 70101. The term “economic disruption” does not include a work stoppage or other employee-related action not related to terrorism and resulting from an employer-employee dispute.
•Improper transportation of a hazardous material under 49 U.S.C. 5124 or a comparable state law.
•Unlawful possession, use, sale, distribution, manufacture, purchase, receipt, transfer, shipping, transporting, import, export, storage of, or dealing in an explosive or explosive device. An explosive or explosive device includes an explosive or explosive material as defined in 18 U.S.C. 232(5), 841(c) through 841(f), and 844(j); and a destructive device, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(4) and 26 U.S.C. 5845(f).
•Murder.
•Threat or maliciously conveying false information knowing the same to be false, concerning the deliverance, placement, or detonation of an explosive or other lethal device in or against a place of public use, a state or government facility, a public transportations system, or an infrastructure facility.
•Violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. 1961, et seq., or a comparable State law, where one of the predicate acts found by a jury or admitted by the defendant, consists of one of the permanently disqualifying crimes.
•Attempt to commit the crimes in items (1)-(4) of this section.
•Conspiracy or attempt to commit the crimes in items (5)-(10) of this section.

With the exception of improper transit of a hazardous material, do you real want any of those people boarding an aircraft? Treason is a pretty thing.

ILovetheReds

Definitely shouldn't given GE. Really not that comfortable flying with them either.

If someone was convicted of raping/molesting a child 40 years ago and claimed to turn their life around and got a degree, etc. would you trust them running a day care center with no supervision where a child of yours is attending?

If someone is on the FBI's most wanted list and found guilty of these crimes they should be in jail.

RandomBaritone

This thread is about Global Entry, not PreCheck. As I mentioned a couple of posts up, they aren't even administered by the same agency.

Dubai Stu

Airplane flight is a necessity. The people on a do not fly list should be very limited. I really have a hard time comparing someone going through a standard TSA inspection with someone running an unsupervised daycare center. Further, if you having been following modern US HR, you'd know that the US EEOC has been going after corporations that have rigid unyielding policies against hiring people with criminal records. Any such determination has to be individualized. The evidence is that people do change despite the old quotes to the contrary, (e.g. "one a con, always a con;" a leopard can't change its spots, etc). Besides that, would you really be comfortable with untrusted travelers on trains? I'm riding a train in France next week and am a little nervous. Airport style security and the way trains work is incompatible.

I'm afraid that I have inadvertently hijacked this thread. If people want to continue the debate, I'm happy to start it in the political debate area of the Trusted Traveler thread. We separated the forums a while ago to stop this and I think I inadvertently contaminated this thread. My apologies.

Schutzee

I was denied due to my minor criminal convictions from 1983-1984. I emailed an appeal and received an automated response saying it can take up to six months.

My girlfriend, who probably never returned a library book late, was granted conditional approval.

747FC

For adding to the data points provided on this site, care to share what the offense was? And, did you admit to it on your application/interview?

FWIW, stick with your GF!

chollie

(bolding mine)

I have no problem flying with anyone who has committed any of these crimes and done their time.

If TSA has done their job, how are these pax a threat to me or the plane?

I don't think anyone should be denied Pre or GE or restricted in any other way related to TSA or CBP or flying for a DUI where time has been served.

If a single DUI is a lifetime disqualifier, it means neither former President Bush nor his wife, Laura, would ever be allowed to have Pre or GE, because both have decades-old DUIs on their records.

vhrum

Recently spoke to a fellow passenger on a QR flight to JFK. He works often in the Middle East (white male, for reference). I mentioned GE and he said they wouldn't give it to him because of all his time in the Mid East.

ILovetheReds

You can get precheck with a DUI and almost any criminal offense.

I agree it doesn't make sense to deny someone GE for a 10 year old DUI (makes sense to deny them Nexus since it is a felony offense in Canada and they take Drunk Driving a lot more seriously over here than we do), but it's up to them to make the rules.

If DUI is a disqualifier for GE then Bush or Laura should not be approved. I believe when GWB became president he was required go through the rehab process to be allowed to free enter Canada due to his DUI.

InDenial7

Are there steps one can take after being denied, contacting (e-mailing and writing) the ombudsman and never hearing back? It has been 4+ months since the subject wrote and no peep from anyone. FWIW, this applicant has existing pre-check and an "official" red passport for associated government travel, yet was denied for GE due to a misdemeanor arrest 12+ years ago in college that was wiped from their record. The interviewer had no record of the arrest, but the applicant brought it up during the interview in an attempt of full disclosure when asked. If the applicant is clean enough to get secret clearances, one would think they could get GE.