Stick-on SSSS?
May 10, 2005 | 2:15 pm
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by exerda
Like you, I very rarely have had to show ID at hotels; I think this used to be a bit more prevalent than it is today. Now all they want is a credit card imprint. Heck, I've gotten the government rate when traveling for business before without even having to show my company badge or any other proof I was on government business 
Nice thing to is that Hilton chains will usually let you stay on government rates for leisure travel as well. Called them up and asked and they said no problem.
But I do see a lot more ID checking today in stores for things I'd have never imagined before. I've been ID'd buying Claratin and Tylenol Sinus, apparently because Big Brother thinks I have the potential to be a meth lab runner. Some states have taken this so far as to start requiring you to receive some kind of counseling from a pharmacist, show ID, and sign papers before they'll let you buy cold pills. :rolleye: And don't get me started on the movie theaters that have started the "we ID everyone" policies for R-rated movies. I'm sick of having to show ID for stupid stuff like that.
Most places don't because they still get their money anyway even if it is a fraudulent sale. The banks eat it.
Haven't seen the cold pills though ... are these for non-Rx? I've seen the "over 18?" thing pop up on the checkout screen at Walmart for buying stuff like Dexatrim and other ephedrine-type supplements. We've never been carded for it though ... they just look at us and just hit yes.
Last edited by Superguy; May 10, 2005 at 2:17 pm
May 14, 2005 | 5:55 am
#47
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: OSL, Norway
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by sluggoaafa
OT and curious....please help me understand.
I'm curious how everyone seems to think that checking the ID (State, Government, or Passport) against the BP is 'more' of a revenue protection, not a security protection.
ID says John P. Public
BP says Sally Q. Private
So "Custodian Checkpoint" person allows this person to slip by because they weren't doing their job properly.
How is that a Revenue Issue?
Being from a military background and being in situations to where I had to check IDs to allow people into secure locations, if I allowed Mr. Public into an area with Mrs. Private's pass, that is a security breach.
Same thing at an airport. Allowing someone with a mismatched ID and BP is a Security issue, not Revenue Protection issue.
deal.
I'm curious how everyone seems to think that checking the ID (State, Government, or Passport) against the BP is 'more' of a revenue protection, not a security protection.
ID says John P. Public
BP says Sally Q. Private
So "Custodian Checkpoint" person allows this person to slip by because they weren't doing their job properly.
How is that a Revenue Issue?
Being from a military background and being in situations to where I had to check IDs to allow people into secure locations, if I allowed Mr. Public into an area with Mrs. Private's pass, that is a security breach.
Same thing at an airport. Allowing someone with a mismatched ID and BP is a Security issue, not Revenue Protection issue.
deal.
Now, broad ID checking for flying or pretty much anything accessible by the general public is doomed to fail.
In your past military career you had the simple job of checking the ID to verify that the person was part of a very small population with access to the facilites and keeping the rest of the world out.
With flying you now have the impossible job of keeping a very small population of bad people out and letting the rest of the world in. The number of unknown threats in the rest of the world is large enough that ID checking is not cost effective. That is, you will not reduce risk of security incidents noticeably with this policy.
May 15, 2005 | 5:40 am
#49
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: DL GM, UA 1P, AA GLD
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by eyecue
Thats right! The someone dangerous can take out all the passengers and yet the pilots can still be okay to land the plane. Kind of narrow minded thinking.