Double standard?
 

The latest PR campaign is that a few bad TSA employees do not represent the TSA, yet "a few bad apples" does require a one size fits all screening of the traveling public?





Some may claim precheck is not one size fits all, but precheck in my opinion is just placating to business interest and it is an intrusion into privacy and seems to treat the traveling public as suspect based on a persons flight histories.

Which part of PC do you find an invasion of privacy?

So, you are surprised...
 

that double standards exist in the US? Or is it that you just don't like this particular double standard because it negatively impacts you?

Yes, of course it's a double standard.

It's 11 years too late, now, but I wish someone on 9/13/01 had said that "the actions of the 9/11 terrorists in no way reflect on the vast majority of the traveling public" and that we "have a zero-tolerance policy for such actions" and that anyone found using an aircraft as a weapon in the future would be "reprimanded and, if necessary, retrained." :eek:

Agree with you about precheck, too; it's just a bauble to (attempt to) distract TSA's loudest opponents.

The part where I have to choose if I participate, of my own free will. My lawyer makes this decision for me, thereby absolving me of liability of the decision.

Do I win a lollipop?

Well hello there! You must be new here? :D

(you're pretty much preaching to the choir)

So, to make it simple. If you believe that any question is too personal in that it invades your privacy, you make the simple choice of not answwering it and not proceeding with PC. Again, how is it an invasion or your privacy to be asked a question which you chose to have been asked and then choose to answer?

It's an invasion that people have to give the government tons of personal information that it's not entitled to just for a chance to not get harassed by government when flying - something we took for granted 11 years ago.

I haven't done anything that merits treating me like a criminal simply because I want to get on a plane. Screen me simply, quickly, and effectively. If I alarm on something, by all means resolve it. However, TSA isn't entitled to know more about me than I'm not carrying anything at the time that will harm a plane. No one should have to open their lives to that degree to avoid harassment.

I don't have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean that what I'm doing, where I'm going, and who I'm seeing for how how long is any of the government's damn business either. @:-) Their only business is answering the question of if I have any WEI that could harm a plane. No? Then have a nice flight.

It's not a hard concept, but unfortunately, our government has lost sight of the constitution and respecting the privacy of a free people.

If they think I'm a threat, then build a case against me, arrest me, and get me before a judge. If they can't do that, then leave me the hell alone.

^^

I take it that you are operating on the assumption that the "interview" is end all of discussion and review for a persons authorization for precheck?

From TSA website:

Q. What will TSA do as part of the “pre-screening” of participants?

A. For security reasons, TSA cannot provide specifics about screening procedures. Volunteered participant information is used to make an intelligence-driven risk assessment that could allow some travelers to qualify for expedited screening.
.................................................. .....

This is from a paper written in 2003 from Reason Foundation, I do not know how applicable it is today, but it gives insight into TSA workings

A RISK-BASED AIRPORT SECURITY POLICY
By Robert W. Poole, Jr. with George Passantino
Project Director: Robert W. Poole, Jr.

"For the risk-screening function, TSA’s proposed CAPPS-II would create a massive, intrusive database on the personal and financial details of air travelers. This is far more than required for the task of identifying highrisk
travelers for enhanced scrutiny at airports."