Originally Posted by
Bicostal
Whether or not the risk register results from a process of exclusion or inclusion, whether it’s based on frequent flier status, age, ethnicity, citizenship, criminal record, or any of dozens of parameters is immaterial to the concept - we can (and I believe we should) match security to relative risk.
No, the criteria used to assess risk are not immaterial to the concept. The criteria you have listed would either be unconstitutional to use (ethnicity) or have no demonstrable correlation with security risk.
When courts analyze the legality of government programs that treat people differently based on arbitrary criteria, they want to see the connection between those criteria and the desired outcome. For example, universities may be able to have affirmative action programs if they can show that the criteria they use results in the advancement of a demonstrable state interest.
A similar standard should be applied to TSA as well.
Originally Posted by
Bicostal
Without a doubt, implementation of ANY process is not "free" any more than the execution of security is – though in the case of execution, its bundled into ticket price. It all comes down to how the public will pay for it. And user fees are, IMO, the most equitable – user pays.
Once again, if there is an actual connection between what you are paying for (the background check and fingerprinting) and security risk, then it would be one thing. But as I said earlier, plenty of terrorists could pass such a check, and there is no evidence that someone who passes is less of a risk. Therefore, it appears to be little more than a program that lets people avoid hassle by paying money.