TSA or non-TSA Debate
#1
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
TSA or non-TSA Debate
I got into a friendly debate with my coworkers regarding TSA. In a nutshell, if hypothetically had the option to fly on a flight without TSA security, would you? On one hand, it'd be cheaper, no waiting in lines, no restrictions on what you could bring with you, and no screening. On the other hand, everyone else flying with you isn't screened either. Would you book TSA or non-TSA?
#3
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
#4




Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: BNA (Nashville)
Programs: HH Diamond
Posts: 7,192
Like I said, the personal value of the security provided is more about the people on the ground, not the people on the plane. TSA security isn't to provide security for the passengers. Did you think it was?
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,985
Should there be passenger screening? I think YES is the clear answer but government employees should not perform that task. TSA should be a regulatory agency only. Screeners should be employees of the airport. Screenings should be limited to actual WEI and not water, baby formula, embossed purses, cupcakes in jars, and all the other non-WEI items TSA has confiscated over the years.
This discussion is just plowing a field already plowed.
This discussion is just plowing a field already plowed.
#6
Formerly known as tireman77
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,817
I view TSA as theatre designed to make people feel safer about flying. Could it thwart some idiot trying to do something stupid? Sure. Does it have any real value in preventing a major threat...not in my opinion.
If I recall, Domestic flights in New Zealand under 90 seats do not require it and small airports no not do it.
The odds of an incident without screening are still infinitesimally small so yes; I'd willingly fly without any screening.
If I recall, Domestic flights in New Zealand under 90 seats do not require it and small airports no not do it.
The odds of an incident without screening are still infinitesimally small so yes; I'd willingly fly without any screening.
#7
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
A large, private jet and a commercial airliner both represent the same threat to people on the ground. Yet the security at a standard FBO, governed largely by market forces, is radically different from TSA at a public airport, which is governed by public policy. Should market forces be allowed to govern security at public airports, or only at private airports?
#8
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
Should there be passenger screening? I think YES is the clear answer but government employees should not perform that task. TSA should be a regulatory agency only. Screeners should be employees of the airport. Screenings should be limited to actual WEI and not water, baby formula, embossed purses, cupcakes in jars, and all the other non-WEI items TSA has confiscated over the years.
This discussion is just plowing a field already plowed.
This discussion is just plowing a field already plowed.
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,985
I probably was too general in my question. The friendly debate was more along the lines of "If MDW had TSA and ORD didn't, which would you fly and how much of a premium would pay to do so?" The underlying assumptions are that you still have to show an ID to fly, and your luggage can be searched, but it's at the airline's discretion, just like a private FBO.
#10




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Programs: NZ Elite
Posts: 6,518
But if the 'security" you object to was removed... and THEN an incident occurred as a result, would YOU sue or expect compensation of any sort? I think thats the question. If you would take legal action AFTER choosing the "unscreened" option, then you weren't REALLY against "security", right?
#11
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
But if the 'security" you object to was removed... and THEN an incident occurred as a result, would YOU sue or expect compensation of any sort? I think thats the question. If you would take legal action AFTER choosing the "unscreened" option, then you weren't REALLY against "security", right? 

#12
Original Poster



Join Date: Jan 2025
Programs: DL DM, Bonvoy LTP
Posts: 206
#14
Formerly known as tireman77
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,817
#15


Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,825
From their FAQ re: TSA:
What is the security process at JSX?
Your safety is our top priority, and JSX is proud of its industry leading TSA-approved security program, offering Customers a secure travel experience without compromising the convenience you expect from JSX.
Some examples of how we prioritize your safety and security when traveling with JSX include:
-Vetting all Customers through TSA Secure Flight, the same TSA-provided background check process used by the major airlines.
-Using state-of-the-art Evolv walk-through metal detectors.
-Being the first public charter operator to deploy advanced x-ray technology.
-Screening all Customer and Crewmember baggage for explosives and other dangerous items.
-Confirming Customer identification both at check-in and at boarding.
-Equipping all JSX aircraft with reinforced flight deck doors.
Please remember that the transport of illicit or illegal substances or materials in checked or carry-on baggage or otherwise is strictly prohibited by law and is subject to seizure and prosecution by law enforcement or by local governing agencies.
Transport of illicit or illegal substances or materials could lead to fines, prosecution, or legal and other administrative actions. JSX will contact law enforcement if suspected substances are identified in checked or carry-on baggage or otherwise, and JSX reserves the right to deny boarding and/or take other action as deemed necessary in its sole discretion.


