Trusted passengers
Jan 23, 2003, 9:29 am
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nashville -Past DL Plat, FO, WN-CP, various hotel programs
Programs: DL-MM, AA, SW w/companion,HiltonDiamond, Hyatt PLat, IHF Plat, Miles and Points Seeker
Posts: 11,073
Okay, so we eventually go through with it and do this trusted traveler thing giving you a "pass" to prance through the gates of h@ll. If you set all the arguments about privacy, which is easier for traveling, etc aside, then think about the end result.
I am sure it might have some expiration date, but how do they know if "the trusted traveler" hase decided to become a bad buy, who now has this "pass" and is trusted? Or maybe you are a "trusted traveler" but now decide you should carry weapons for your own safety. From a security standpoint this does not make sense. It only makes sense if we want to give special treatment to a select group, while at the same time knowing we have just created a large security risk.
But then again, if you are not trying to find terrorists and only have window dressing to make the average layman "feel safe", then go for it1
I am sure it might have some expiration date, but how do they know if "the trusted traveler" hase decided to become a bad buy, who now has this "pass" and is trusted? Or maybe you are a "trusted traveler" but now decide you should carry weapons for your own safety. From a security standpoint this does not make sense. It only makes sense if we want to give special treatment to a select group, while at the same time knowing we have just created a large security risk.
But then again, if you are not trying to find terrorists and only have window dressing to make the average layman "feel safe", then go for it1
Jan 23, 2003, 5:02 pm
#47
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
This program was proposed at about the same time the TSA was created. As much as I dislike the TSA, I don't think that there is anything underhanded going on here.
Yes, I think that secondary harassment should go away. Heck, I think the TSA should go away.
But, like Ess, my fingerprints are already on file and I have been in enough government buildings that all my other numbers are already on file too. If the government will allow me to VOLUNTARILY submit to a background check to avoid hassles, then I am going for it.
This program, if instituted, would be VOLUNTARY. You don't want to be checked out, don't apply.
Yes, I think that secondary harassment should go away. Heck, I think the TSA should go away.
But, like Ess, my fingerprints are already on file and I have been in enough government buildings that all my other numbers are already on file too. If the government will allow me to VOLUNTARILY submit to a background check to avoid hassles, then I am going for it.
This program, if instituted, would be VOLUNTARY. You don't want to be checked out, don't apply.
Jan 23, 2003, 5:12 pm
#48
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NoStressHere:
Okay, so we eventually go through with it and do this trusted traveler thing giving you a "pass" to prance through the gates of h@ll. If you set all the arguments about privacy, which is easier for traveling, etc aside, then think about the end result.
I am sure it might have some expiration date, but how do they know if "the trusted traveler" hase decided to become a bad buy, who now has this "pass" and is trusted? Or maybe you are a "trusted traveler" but now decide you should carry weapons for your own safety. From a security standpoint this does not make sense. It only makes sense if we want to give special treatment to a select group, while at the same time knowing we have just created a large security risk.
But then again, if you are not trying to find terrorists and only have window dressing to make the average layman "feel safe", then go for it1</font>
Okay, so we eventually go through with it and do this trusted traveler thing giving you a "pass" to prance through the gates of h@ll. If you set all the arguments about privacy, which is easier for traveling, etc aside, then think about the end result.
I am sure it might have some expiration date, but how do they know if "the trusted traveler" hase decided to become a bad buy, who now has this "pass" and is trusted? Or maybe you are a "trusted traveler" but now decide you should carry weapons for your own safety. From a security standpoint this does not make sense. It only makes sense if we want to give special treatment to a select group, while at the same time knowing we have just created a large security risk.
But then again, if you are not trying to find terrorists and only have window dressing to make the average layman "feel safe", then go for it1</font>
Jan 23, 2003, 5:34 pm
#49
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
As I told the head case supervisor, and then her supervisor on Monday, I trust nobody.
I guess that is why I have had such great success in the Security Industry.
I guess that is why I have had such great success in the Security Industry.
Jan 23, 2003, 7:46 pm
#52
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 44,553
Look at seat belts. Initially, they were just there, and you didn't have to use them. Then, what, around 1986 or so, they became mandatory, but not the type of offense for which a police officer could pull you over. Today, you don't even have that, even if you are Ma Kettle, living in the middle of nowhere, and use your car just to go to the grocery store.
I know that's a lame analogy, but my thinking is that the trusted traveler program would be too tempting a program not to impose it on everyone who flies, after it becomes so popular with a flying public which detests the lines and searches, as Spiff and others do. It makes the government, by extension, popular in turn.
Look at another example of where the government takes a "temporary" program and makes it permanent: toll booths. None of them were supposed to last, it was only until this was paid for, or that was paid for, but the money was just too good, so they broke their promises. Now, they have EZ Pass, which can make toll booths obsolete, and give us back our freedom to drive without them, but you are still paying the toll tax!
Edit: as I look at this post, I know I could do better, but I'm kind of tired - sorry!
[This message has been edited by anonplz (edited 01-23-2003).]
I know that's a lame analogy, but my thinking is that the trusted traveler program would be too tempting a program not to impose it on everyone who flies, after it becomes so popular with a flying public which detests the lines and searches, as Spiff and others do. It makes the government, by extension, popular in turn.
Look at another example of where the government takes a "temporary" program and makes it permanent: toll booths. None of them were supposed to last, it was only until this was paid for, or that was paid for, but the money was just too good, so they broke their promises. Now, they have EZ Pass, which can make toll booths obsolete, and give us back our freedom to drive without them, but you are still paying the toll tax!
Edit: as I look at this post, I know I could do better, but I'm kind of tired - sorry!
[This message has been edited by anonplz (edited 01-23-2003).]
Jan 23, 2003, 8:59 pm
#54
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BWI
Programs: AA PLT and that's that!
Posts: 8,349
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by CameraGuy:
Never say Never, but how could it become mandatory?</font>
Never say Never, but how could it become mandatory?</font>
http://www.cato.org/dailys/02-07-02.html
Anyone who thinks the 'Trusted Traveler' program won't evolve into something much more intrusive, need only look at the history of social security numbers. Technology is far more advanced now than it was then. I think we have much to worry about with this program.
Jan 23, 2003, 10:52 pm
#55
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 592
Leave it to the politicians to create a problem and then try to make themselves into heroes by proposing a solution (which, of course, never eliminates the problem, and always has a "gotcha"). Here the problem is an unusable security system which has been foisted upon us by our good friends in Congress, with widespread public support. The proposed "trusted traveler" solution not only fails to take care of the problem - countless millions who are just as trustworthy as anyone else will still be subject to an unusable system for not being card-carrying Friends of Big Brother - but will cause our collective privacy to be eroded that much more in the process. Of course, one could argue that the magnitude of the erosion wouldn't be that great, because every passenger already gets a pre-flight background check courtesy of CAPPS...
I hang my head in sadness at the prospect of applying for government authorization to travel without hindrance in my own country (and to think my schoolteachers used to tell me this was one of the things that made the Soviet Union a Bad Place to Live). Like other posters on this thread I have zero trust that the government would limit the program to its original intended purpose. (When has that ever happened?) Forget the "trusted traveler" program - a smoke-and-mirrors answer to smoke-and-mirrors "security." Make the system usable like it was before and everyone benefits.
I hang my head in sadness at the prospect of applying for government authorization to travel without hindrance in my own country (and to think my schoolteachers used to tell me this was one of the things that made the Soviet Union a Bad Place to Live). Like other posters on this thread I have zero trust that the government would limit the program to its original intended purpose. (When has that ever happened?) Forget the "trusted traveler" program - a smoke-and-mirrors answer to smoke-and-mirrors "security." Make the system usable like it was before and everyone benefits.
Jan 24, 2003, 7:54 am
#56
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Factotum:
Leave it to the politicians to create a problem and then try to make themselves into heroes by proposing a solution (which, of course, never eliminates the problem, and always has a "gotcha"). Here the problem is an unusable security system which has been foisted upon us by our good friends in Congress, with widespread public support. The proposed "trusted traveler" solution not only fails to take care of the problem - countless millions who are just as trustworthy as anyone else will still be subject to an unusable system for not being card-carrying Friends of Big Brother - but will cause our collective privacy to be eroded that much more in the process. Of course, one could argue that the magnitude of the erosion wouldn't be that great, because every passenger already gets a pre-flight background check courtesy of CAPPS...
I hang my head in sadness at the prospect of applying for government authorization to travel without hindrance in my own country (and to think my schoolteachers used to tell me this was one of the things that made the Soviet Union a Bad Place to Live). Like other posters on this thread I have zero trust that the government would limit the program to its original intended purpose. (When has that ever happened?) Forget the "trusted traveler" program - a smoke-and-mirrors answer to smoke-and-mirrors "security." Make the system usable like it was before and everyone benefits.
I will have to disagree on one point. That old usable system cost the lives of thousands. Why it did not happen prior to 911 who knows because most security experts have been talking about how lax it was for years. If you do not want to be screened because you feel violated there are many other means of travel. I do not think some of you are thinking realistically. The world is shrinking with technology. That's a fact. You will probably be dead by the time Big Brother has a serious grip. Other countries are far off worse.
Leave it to the politicians to create a problem and then try to make themselves into heroes by proposing a solution (which, of course, never eliminates the problem, and always has a "gotcha"). Here the problem is an unusable security system which has been foisted upon us by our good friends in Congress, with widespread public support. The proposed "trusted traveler" solution not only fails to take care of the problem - countless millions who are just as trustworthy as anyone else will still be subject to an unusable system for not being card-carrying Friends of Big Brother - but will cause our collective privacy to be eroded that much more in the process. Of course, one could argue that the magnitude of the erosion wouldn't be that great, because every passenger already gets a pre-flight background check courtesy of CAPPS...
I hang my head in sadness at the prospect of applying for government authorization to travel without hindrance in my own country (and to think my schoolteachers used to tell me this was one of the things that made the Soviet Union a Bad Place to Live). Like other posters on this thread I have zero trust that the government would limit the program to its original intended purpose. (When has that ever happened?) Forget the "trusted traveler" program - a smoke-and-mirrors answer to smoke-and-mirrors "security." Make the system usable like it was before and everyone benefits.
I will have to disagree on one point. That old usable system cost the lives of thousands. Why it did not happen prior to 911 who knows because most security experts have been talking about how lax it was for years. If you do not want to be screened because you feel violated there are many other means of travel. I do not think some of you are thinking realistically. The world is shrinking with technology. That's a fact. You will probably be dead by the time Big Brother has a serious grip. Other countries are far off worse.
Jan 24, 2003, 9:32 am
#57
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BWI
Programs: AA PLT and that's that!
Posts: 8,349
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tsadude:
I will have to disagree on one point. That old usable system cost the lives of thousands. Why it did not happen prior to 911 who knows because most security experts have been talking about how lax it was for years. If you do not want to be screened because you feel violated there are many other means of travel. I do not think some of you are thinking realistically. The world is shrinking with technology. That's a fact. You will probably be dead by the time Big Brother has a serious grip. Other countries are far off worse.</font>
I will have to disagree on one point. That old usable system cost the lives of thousands. Why it did not happen prior to 911 who knows because most security experts have been talking about how lax it was for years. If you do not want to be screened because you feel violated there are many other means of travel. I do not think some of you are thinking realistically. The world is shrinking with technology. That's a fact. You will probably be dead by the time Big Brother has a serious grip. Other countries are far off worse.</font>
The only people thinking unrealistically are the bozos in charge of this mess and the screeners they have brainwashed to think it is good. Please don't tell me I can travel by other means. I'll continue to fly and I'll put up with this BS as much as I need to and I'll continue to write letters and voice my concerns.
Jan 24, 2003, 12:32 pm
#58
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tazi:
[B] The old system did not cause those people to lose their lives unless you mean because boxcutters were allowed on the planes. The new system is a joke. The big holes in security still exist because over a year as been spent on searching for harmless metal objects rather than doing something about those areas.
/B]</font>
[B] The old system did not cause those people to lose their lives unless you mean because boxcutters were allowed on the planes. The new system is a joke. The big holes in security still exist because over a year as been spent on searching for harmless metal objects rather than doing something about those areas.
/B]</font>
[This message has been edited by tsadude (edited 01-24-2003).]
[This message has been edited by tsadude (edited 01-24-2003).]
Jan 26, 2003, 11:00 pm
#59
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: أمريكا
Posts: 26,763
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by JS:
A centralized government database holding the details of private citizens is a very scary thought. It may be voluntary at first, but eventually the feds will say "gee, this is such a successful program, let's make it mandatory".</font>
A centralized government database holding the details of private citizens is a very scary thought. It may be voluntary at first, but eventually the feds will say "gee, this is such a successful program, let's make it mandatory".</font>
d
Jan 31, 2003, 1:17 pm
#60
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy:
The government is already working on this. I've posted some of the news articles talking about the system and John Poindexter, who is in charge of it, in OMNI and In The News. Basically the goal that has been set is to track every piece of information about every person, from bank and telephone statements to where you travel. It's a pretty big undertaking.
d</font>
The government is already working on this. I've posted some of the news articles talking about the system and John Poindexter, who is in charge of it, in OMNI and In The News. Basically the goal that has been set is to track every piece of information about every person, from bank and telephone statements to where you travel. It's a pretty big undertaking.
d</font>
http://www.thepowerhour.com/docs/fm3-19-40.pdf