Pre-check is profiling, TSA-style.

'Profiling' usually means trying to identify the handful of 'bad-niks' in a population of innocent people (because the vast majority of people are innocent in this context). If you are identified as a 'bad-nik', you're probably facing additional scrutiny for life, because mistakes are never made and hey, once a 'bad-nik', always a 'bad-nik'.

'Profiling' TSA-style means trying to identify the handful of conditionally trust-worthy people (because TSA security functions on the assumption that the vast majority of people are guilty of something, even if it has nothing to do with aviation security). If you are identified as a 'good-nik', you're still only trusted until the next time, because mistakes are made all the time and hey, just because you're a 'good-nik' today, no guarantee you'll still be a 'good-nik' tomorrow.

The ugly thing about this is that TSA's approach is that everyone is guilty and deserving of extra scrutiny be default. TSA is trying to identify the trustworthy people on a case-by-case, flight-by-flight basis. That means the folks who aren't Pre-check qualified (or who are, but didn't get cleared for this particular flight) are even more suspicious than before - otherwise they would have been Pre-check cleared.

There are too kinds of profiling: racial profiling and behavior profiling. There's a stigma that TLV security does a lot of racial profiling. The majority of security, however, is done via behavior profiling. There's no reason the TSA should refuse this kind. This violates no amendments or "ideals." It doesn't care about your dress, skin color, or religion. It cares about how you're acting, how you respond to questions, etc.

In TLV, there's an initial security check upon driving into the airport complex, which is quick with just a couple of questions, followed by a preliminary questioning while waiting on line to check-in, followed by the regular hand check. During all this time, there are plainclothes security officers walking around the airport and monitoring the whole airport from security cameras, one-way mirrors, etc. They aren't looking at your race - they're looking at your behavior. And they're quite successful.
Do they do racial profiling as well? Yes. But not on a level even close to the stereotype surrounding. Has it succeeded? Yes

Even if the TSA doesn't want to do racial profiling, they can at least do more behavior profiling and ween themselves off of "guilty until shown maybe not guilty." And this would not treat everyone the same.

A big problem with TSA security is the initial check is done at the hand-bag check. In Israel, checks have been done before you get to the airport, combined with intelligence to know if something is going on, as well as perimeter security on multiple fronts...

Excellent analysis

A bigger problem is that the TSA hasn't even been able to detect the criminals in their own ranks via their "trained" behavioral detection personnel.

Even when those personnel *are* the criminals. Minetta Walker, for example.

As long as the TSA is hiring people who're otherwise completely unemployable (for lack of things like "customer service values," "honesty," or "integrity," as just a few examples) then none of these grandiose plans for making "security" work via TSA methodologies will ever come to fruition in a useful fashion.

Another fair point

In the United States one does not have to explain oneself or answer questions as to why, where or any other reason for travel.

Doing these things damage the very fabric of American society and should be refused by all patriots.

The questions needn't have anything to do with why you're traveling. I rarely get asked why I'm traveling when departing TLV.
And even if you do, those hardly damage the fabric of American society compared to NoS on the one hand, or security threats on the other.

The TSA does profile, they just are doing it wrong, i.e. "BDO" looking at people in the line or having "mini-conversations." Profiling by simple race or ethnicity would be inifinitely worse and an equally bad idea.

As another person referenced, I'm of mixed feeling regarding Precheck. On the one hand, I will benefit. On the other hand, everybody else in the "default" line will suffer. However, maybe that is not the worst thing in the world if the "we should do anything for security" crowd has to do "a lot for security."

I personally think that any 'profiling' or BDO activities should be taken completely out of the hands of TSA. If we're going to go that route, it should be done by people in a department set up specifically for that purpose, and that department should be staffed by people who are not currently in government work. This would eliminate many of the problems TSA 'inherited' when it got staffed by rejects, trouble-makers, incompetents and retirees from other departments.

Otherwise, I don't see it ending up as anything but an ineffective, bloated, mis-managed unsupervised mess. You aren't going to get world-class profiling by doubling the pay of a few TSOs and giving them a 2-week training class that consists of videos, powerpoint presentations and 3 'buddy' exercises.

Actually, a more effective use of folks currently earning better pay as BDOs and SPOTs would be to turn them loose on the TSO ranks. If they are truly effective, that would be an easy way to prove it - much more likely to find a dishonest TSO than a terrorist statistically. That would provide on-the-job training, an opportunity to evaluate skills, get rid of BDOs and SPOTs who don't get results, and boost the morale of the good TSOs by weeding out the dishonest ones whose actions reflect badly on the organization and jeopardize citizen safety.

The questions need not question why, where, how long staying, purpose of travel and so forth but sadly that is not what is happening.

When government believes it can ask such questions and determine ones right to travel based on those answers then yes, it does damage the fabric of society.

Now if TSA wants to ask questions unrelated to the why, where or such, and stick to things like "isn't it warm today?" or such then I'm ok with that.

To me, PreCheck is simply a way of placating the group of travelers that complains the most about airport security: frequent fliers. The exact same thing happened with the pilots. Pilots started complaining about the body scanners, and rather than getting rid of them, TSA gave pilots an exemption in order to shut them up. That way, they can continue to use the scanners and the pilots (which are backed by powerful and vocal unions) won't complain. Now the same thing is happening with frequent fliers. TSA will be able to continue this security theater, but the group of passengers that complains the most will largely be exempt and therefore keep quiet.

What we have here appears to be something in between: The questions asked relate to travel, but subsequent actions depend on the manner in which the questions are answered, not the answer themselves. This is a rather peculiar constructions from a constitutional standpoint.

In generally have no complaint about questions related to my travel as these details are already available to the government.

Questions that relate to what I will be doing while NOT traveling are invasive.

"To where are you flying?" Okay.

"What will you do when you get there?" Not okay.