Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID
#286
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
I'm not saying that securely checking ID is some kind of silver bullet in aviation security. I am saying that it is has some value if done correctly. I don't buy the argument that checking ID at the checkpoint could never have any value but I fully agree that it has almost no value as TSA does it today for all the reasons posted by others (inscure ID, insecure BPs, etc etc)
nrg
#287
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
If we can agree that there are some people who should not be permitted to fly, then there needs to be a means to prevent them from flying.
#288
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA EXP, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 26,930
Yes I do. If they get through a metal detector and appear not to be a threat to others, they should be able to fly.
If they appear unfit to fly (intoxicated, boisterous, etc...), the airline is able to legally deny them boarding.
I don't want the government determining who is fit to fly and who is not.
I guess we can't agree.
If they appear unfit to fly (intoxicated, boisterous, etc...), the airline is able to legally deny them boarding.
I don't want the government determining who is fit to fly and who is not.
If we can agree that there are some people who should not be permitted to fly, then there needs to be a means to prevent them from flying.
#289
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,725
Just harmful stuff but not harmful people? Do you really want it that way? My point was that if the holes in the ID checking process were closed (secure BP, secure ID, and accurate selectee/no fly lists), then there is security value with checking IDs to match BPs. And not to keep out well organized terrorists who would still manage to get by a more secure ID check as many have pointed out. What about someone who has been banned from flying because he got drunk and assaulted another PAX? Or someone who is mentally unstable and has been known to attempt opening emergency exits mid-flight? I don't want to those kinds on my flight either. How would they be prevented from boarding if we had no ID checking?
The best way to keep drunks, criminals, and the criminally insane off the streets let alone off of planes is for the police to do good legal police work, prosecutors to prosecute the offenders in open court, and judges and juries to sentence the offenders to long harsh sentences.
The best way to keep domestic or foreign terrorists off planes is a combination of some (proper, legal) domestic law enforcement and a lot of overseas intelligence gathering. The best way to keep foreign terrorists off of planes to and within the USA is to do good intelligence gathering and not let them into the USA, and to secure the border. The best way to keep foreign terrorists from attempting to enter the USA is for the US military to kill as many of them as possible as close to their homes (and as far from ours) as possible.
None of this is enhanced by TSA ID checks or ID checks by anyone else for that matter. The only point of TSA ID checks is to enforce the secret, un-American, unconstitutional blacklist that is the no-fly-list (which doesn't even include the names of many actual terrorists) and to condition us to a papers-please government-permission-based travel regime.
If a terrorists makes it to a domestic airport and tries to clear a checkpoint, the military, intelligence, immigration control, and domestic law enforcement have already failed. At that point, do you really think that asking for an ID is going to matter? The only thing that would help after all those failures is effectively screening the passenger for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries. Now that cockpit doors are secure and we've abandoned the policy of hijacker cooperation, it's extremely unlikely that any terrorist is going to bring down a plane without some sort of weapon/explosive. Unfortunately TSA is too obsessed with toothpaste and ID checks to effectively screen for those real threats.
(BTW attempting to open emergency exits in flight is more of a joke than a threat. There is no way for human force to overcome the thousands of pounds of pressure differential on a door at even a fairly low altitude and speed. That's one of several reasons the doors have to come inside the plane a bit before they go out; the other key reason being so that the door doesn't randomly fly out of the plane.)
This attitude of "if I have to show my ID to fly, then the terrorists win" is complete nonsense. The terrorists win if I'm forced to speak Arabic and memorize the Q'ran. Otherwise, not so much.
#290
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
We will have to agree to disagree on that point.
#291
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,231
...I'm wide awake but I'm not sure you are. Are you seriously suggesting that the proper response to 911 is to NOT change our lives in any way whatsoever? This attitude of "if I have to show my ID to fly, then the terrorists win" is complete nonsense. The terrorists win if I'm forced to speak Arabic and memorize the Q'ran. Otherwise, not so much. And like I've already said, there are other people besides terrorists whom I don't want on my flight.
Interesting, but not related to the point I was making, which is that checking IDs against BP's at airports could have security value if done right. I totally agree that the way it's done today is a joke.
Interesting, but not related to the point I was making, which is that checking IDs against BP's at airports could have security value if done right. I totally agree that the way it's done today is a joke.
Guess what. Pure nonsense.
Terrorists terrorize because they have a political agenda and use terror to strongarm the public into changing their government or policies. They are not going to come to the US and impose Islamic law, that is the most ridiculous suggestion out there.
They hate the US not because of our freedoms - but because we stick our fat nose in the business of other countries, abandon our allies (Afghanistan post-Soviet liberation, Balkans, etc.) and continue to support countries these people don't like.
As far as 'do nothing' after 9/11 - in actuality, that's pretty much where we're at outside of a number of draconian and ineffective, hostile policies that were implemented. There is almost nothing the government has done to stop a determined terrorist - they are trying to plug holes in the dike with their fingers.
The most effective thing done since 9/11? Hardened flight deck doors and a no-cooperation policy with hijackers.
The lease effective thing done? No port security to speak of, no air cargo security and the ID check we're debating here.
ID checks are useless even if boarding passes are made tamper proof - why? Because identities themselves are not secure. With some money and the right contacts, I can assume the identity of almost anyone, actual or ficticious. I can create a new identity for myself or take someone else's.
It's the principle of garbage-in, garbage-out.
All this does is interfere with 'casual' terrorists - the ones who lack the full-on training and determination of the 9/11 group. Casual terrorists are not going to attack our airplanes or ports - they're going to show up in a mall with a backpack bomb. The people who planned and orchestrated 9/11 are not going to be deterred by what we're doing - they will find a way around it.
As you can see, when someone wants to do harm, they will. We should take reasonable measures to protect ourselves, but wasting resources on ineffective measures or low-priority threats leaves us more vulnerable to bigger threats.
#292
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
The best way to keep drunks, criminals, and the criminally insane off the streets let alone off of planes is for the police to do good legal police work, prosecutors to prosecute the offenders in open court, and judges and juries to sentence the offenders to long harsh sentences.
The best way to keep domestic or foreign terrorists off planes is a combination of some (proper, legal) domestic law enforcement and a lot of overseas intelligence gathering. The best way to keep foreign terrorists off of planes to and within the USA is to do good intelligence gathering and not let them into the USA, and to secure the border. The best way to keep foreign terrorists from attempting to enter the USA is for the US military to kill as many of them as possible as close to their homes (and as far from ours) as possible.
I don't want the government (fill in the blank)_________
and probably not for the first time. But hey, this is what free speech is all about.
You make an excellent point. On the opposite end, there was a FTer that actually suggested that HE would be OK having 1 or 2 planes fall out of the sky per month due to terrorists in exchange for eliminating TSA and not having to endure their screening. Of course, I'm sure he would change his mind if he was on board one of those 1 or 2 planes or in the impact zone when those planes came down.
As far as 'do nothing' after 9/11 - in actuality, that's pretty much where we're at outside of a number of draconian and ineffective, hostile policies that were implemented. There is almost nothing the government has done to stop a determined terrorist - they are trying to plug holes in the dike with their fingers.
The most effective thing done since 9/11? Hardened flight deck doors and a no-cooperation policy with hijackers.
The lease effective thing done? No port security to speak of, no air cargo security and the ID check we're debating here.
The most effective thing done since 9/11? Hardened flight deck doors and a no-cooperation policy with hijackers.
The lease effective thing done? No port security to speak of, no air cargo security and the ID check we're debating here.
ID checks are useless even if boarding passes are made tamper proof - why? Because identities themselves are not secure. With some money and the right contacts, I can assume the identity of almost anyone, actual or ficticious. I can create a new identity for myself or take someone else's.
All this does is interfere with 'casual' terrorists - the ones who lack the full-on training and determination of the 9/11 group. Casual terrorists are not going to attack our airplanes or ports - they're going to show up in a mall with a backpack bomb. The people who planned and orchestrated 9/11 are not going to be deterred by what we're doing - they will find a way around it.
As you can see, when someone wants to do harm, they will. We should take reasonable measures to protect ourselves, but wasting resources on ineffective measures or low-priority threats leaves us more vulnerable to bigger threats.
As you can see, when someone wants to do harm, they will. We should take reasonable measures to protect ourselves, but wasting resources on ineffective measures or low-priority threats leaves us more vulnerable to bigger threats.
Last edited by scoow; Nov 19, 2009 at 10:50 pm Reason: merge multiple consecutive posts
#293
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
That's all well and good at the gate but not so much at 35,000 feet. I'd rather show my ID than have my flight diverted so some idiot can be kicked off and arrested that might have been kept off the flight if we'd had secure ID's checked against secure BP's and against a real no-fly list.
If you are a citizen of the United States, I would suggest you re-read the Constitution and attain a better understanding of what it means. You are, literally, arguing for, "a little tyranny."
#294
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,231
I agree. I did a lot of travel before 9/11 and can remember some security checkpoints that were a complete joke. I saw equipment that didn't work and security guards that couldn't get a job at Burger King. Yes, TSA has more than it's share of boneheads, but let's not pretend that security was just fine before the TSA came along.
Of course the ID must also be secure or checking it is meaningless. No ID is 100% secure but some are quite secure. You might be able to buy a fake DL in any major city but buying a fake passport that will get out in and out of the country is another matter.
#295
Join Date: Jan 2007
Programs: PC Pl, UA 1K, CC Gl
Posts: 2,235
This is a non-argument. TSO may not deny access to the sterile area to someone based on the fact that they (1) have a criminal record, (2) have been committed to a mental institution, (3) have outstanding warrants (which could be for anything from traffic tickets to murder), (4) based on their possession of controlled substances, (5) based on their possession of cash in any amount, or (6) based on their possession of potentially illegal items, e.g. child pornography, patent-infringing articles, etc.
If you are a citizen of the United States, I would suggest you re-read the Constitution and attain a better understanding of what it means. You are, literally, arguing for, "a little tyranny."
If you are a citizen of the United States, I would suggest you re-read the Constitution and attain a better understanding of what it means. You are, literally, arguing for, "a little tyranny."
2. How your ID helps with No fly list? I've never seen them matching it against any list, do they know all the names by heart?
3. If you go to Russia, Ukraine, Afganistan etc and buy there passport with your picture and a different name, how TSA is going to know that it's fake? Are they trained to determine legitimacy of passports of all the countries of this world?
May be someone can experiment and create a passport of the country that does not exist, like Rebublic of Provance, and see if TSA will let you in.
#296
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
Let suppose for a minute that the BP is secure and the no-fly list contains only genuine bad guys. Then the list would contain names of those banned from flying because of previous convictions of aviation offenses. If that were true, then there would be no way for a person on the list to get a BP under his own name. So the next option is to fly under the name of someone else. So the bad guy buys a ticket under some bogus name and gets a BP issued. So far so good. Now he tries to go to the gate. The only way he gets stopped is if he cannot produce ID that matches the BP. That's easy enough to do today by getting a fake DL. But if the ID were secure it would be a lot harder but not impossible. Sure he could fly to Belize and buy a passport but most people would not be willing to do so. Capiche?
I'd bet you'd get in.
#297
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
As you're so fond of saying ... apples and oranges.
At an international border, you're asking permission as a citizen of one county to enter another country. It is not unreasonable for the country you are entering to exercise its prerogative to control who may, and may not, enter the country.
At a TSA checkpoint, a U.S. citizen is effectively reduced to asking for permission from the U.S. government to travel within their own country ... indeed, sometimes within their own state. That is a completely different matter.
And your notion that those on the no-fly/selectee lists are a clear and present danger to aviation is somewhat speculative. We have no idea how anyone gets on the list, much less how anyone gets off the list. Worse, the most important threats to aviation aren't on the list at all, for fear that they might find out that they are on the list itself.
At an international border, you're asking permission as a citizen of one county to enter another country. It is not unreasonable for the country you are entering to exercise its prerogative to control who may, and may not, enter the country.
At a TSA checkpoint, a U.S. citizen is effectively reduced to asking for permission from the U.S. government to travel within their own country ... indeed, sometimes within their own state. That is a completely different matter.
And your notion that those on the no-fly/selectee lists are a clear and present danger to aviation is somewhat speculative. We have no idea how anyone gets on the list, much less how anyone gets off the list. Worse, the most important threats to aviation aren't on the list at all, for fear that they might find out that they are on the list itself.
#298
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,231
If the list was designed to do exactly what it was suppose to do, there would be only a few hundred names on it or so, and it wouldn't be maintained by the TSA, although they could run passenger names against it to find a match.
Even then - not even close to foolproof. The alternate identities are still far too easy to get and are a simple bypass to this entire apparatus.
#299
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PDX
Programs: AS, DL, UA, AC, Nexus, TSA Pre
Posts: 364
As you're so fond of saying ... apples and oranges.
At an international border, you're asking permission as a citizen of one county to enter another country. It is not unreasonable for the country you are entering to exercise its prerogative to control who may, and may not, enter the country.
At a TSA checkpoint, a U.S. citizen is effectively reduced to asking for permission from the U.S. government to travel within their own country ... indeed, sometimes within their own state. That is a completely different matter.
At an international border, you're asking permission as a citizen of one county to enter another country. It is not unreasonable for the country you are entering to exercise its prerogative to control who may, and may not, enter the country.
At a TSA checkpoint, a U.S. citizen is effectively reduced to asking for permission from the U.S. government to travel within their own country ... indeed, sometimes within their own state. That is a completely different matter.
And your notion that those on the no-fly/selectee lists are a clear and present danger to aviation is somewhat speculative. We have no idea how anyone gets on the list, much less how anyone gets off the list. Worse, the most important threats to aviation aren't on the list at all, for fear that they might find out that they are on the list itself.
Back to my original argument: IF BPs where secure and IF ID's were secure and IF the NF list was accurate, then checking IDs at the checkpoint would help make flying more secure. No, checking IDs by itself would not stop every bad guy or terrorist who wants in to the sterile area. But if the above conditions were met, then I think the inconvenience and intrusiveness of showing ID could be justified as a legitimate security measure.
What I take issue with are those who claim checking ID's can never make us safer.
#300
Join Date: Jan 2007
Programs: PC Pl, UA 1K, CC Gl
Posts: 2,235
I can't believe I need to explain this but here goes:
Let suppose for a minute that the BP is secure and the no-fly list contains only genuine bad guys. Then the list would contain names of those banned from flying because of previous convictions of aviation offenses. If that were true, then there would be no way for a person on the list to get a BP under his own name. So the next option is to fly under the name of someone else. So the bad guy buys a ticket under some bogus name and gets a BP issued. So far so good. Now he tries to go to the gate. The only way he gets stopped is if he cannot produce ID that matches the BP. That's easy enough to do today by getting a fake DL. But if the ID were secure it would be a lot harder but not impossible. Sure he could fly to Belize and buy a passport but most people would not be willing to do so. Capiche?
Let suppose for a minute that the BP is secure and the no-fly list contains only genuine bad guys. Then the list would contain names of those banned from flying because of previous convictions of aviation offenses. If that were true, then there would be no way for a person on the list to get a BP under his own name. So the next option is to fly under the name of someone else. So the bad guy buys a ticket under some bogus name and gets a BP issued. So far so good. Now he tries to go to the gate. The only way he gets stopped is if he cannot produce ID that matches the BP. That's easy enough to do today by getting a fake DL. But if the ID were secure it would be a lot harder but not impossible. Sure he could fly to Belize and buy a passport but most people would not be willing to do so. Capiche?
Another question: I know someone who bought a ticket under OBL name (when Spirit had $0 fare sale) as a joke. the airline website did not block the sale and OLCI. Should it? Or it's not a known terrorist?