Boy did this topic bring out some strong feelings....
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by UAL Traveler:
Thus far, ever security checkpoint has asked me for ID in the US. </font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by johnep1:
...Now that I think about it, I can't remember being asked for ID at security. They just ask for a boarding pass. IDs are only needed to get a boarding pass and to get on the plane. </font>
At
every airport through which I've gone through security post 9/11, I have been asked for i.d. and b.p. at the security check in order to be allowed to the x-ray machines (SMF, SBA, ONT, RNO, SFO, SJC, STL, MSY, SNA)
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Hagbard Viking:
...I completely fail to see the security aspect of correlating the name on the boarding pass with the name on an ID at the security check point.... </font>
To my perhaps overly simple mind, it is the way to ensure compliance with the statement (that I hear over the p.a. ad nauseum at every airport it seems) that "Only ticketed passengers will be allowed beyong the security checkpoint." I.e., the b.p.
and the i.d. is the way the confirm that it is indeed
you who are the ticketed passenger who is seeking to go airside.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MileJunkie:
do you really expect them to think? They have a hard time dealing with reality, thinking is beyond their capability... </font>
I think that's an unneccesary and over-general slam. There are those who do try to do their job with dignity and thoughtfulness.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy:
And, whether you agree with the policy or not, you shouldn't be arguing with the security screeners. If you don't agree with rules/laws, complain to the people who have the authority to change them </font>
Agreed. It makes no sense to argue with the folks who have no discretion about the policy itself. The carrying out of this particular policy isn't a matter of interpretation (like whether a such-and-such size nail clipper with or sans file is a "potential weapon") about which there can indeed be legitimate complaints of unfairness, capriciousness, etc. The i.d. and b.p. (or official itin, etc.) policy seems pretty easy to understand and enforce -- either you have both or you don't -- and leaves the screener with little need or room for discretion or interpretation. As to whether the policy itself makes any sense, see my next comment. But complaining to the security folks about a policy's senselessness isn't going to be effective.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NoStressHere:
...This is a waste of time </font>
Absolutely.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Rosemarie:
So did they let her thru? </font>
I don't know. I went on -- I had a plane to catch. But I would like to know too.
[This message has been edited by cblaisd (edited 01-21-2002).]