Avoiding Excessive Security when Travelling to the US
 

I would like ask about two possible startegies I am considering:

1. Travel to/from Europe by way of Canada, say, Toronto. Questions are:2. Since I live in Southern California, I can drive across the border to Tijuana or Mexicali. From there I can catch a flight to Mexico City and from there to Europe. Similar questions:Does anyone have any experience with either of these two strategies? Thanks in advance.

The only point I can answer is about Canadian security.

It's a privately-run ship. They run a slightly more professional ship than the TSA. No shoe carnivals up there (but someone mentioned there was one at YVR recently..the first one I heard of in Canada). It was only about 13 months ago did the eliminate the "random" gate screening at YYZ.

But I can say that ANY connecting CHECKED baggage from ANYWHERE outside of the USA (including Canada) will get touched by the TSA tenticles. Several times, I have had delayed baggage because the TSA couldn't check the bag time for my connection from Canada back into the US. I even had a two-hour delayed flight on Christmas Eve because the TSA couldn't check bags fast enough (that's what the Captain told us).

Since 9/11, I have never flown directly from Europe to Canada. But the automatic pat-downs you get at FRA don't make you feel as dirty as a TSA pat-down. I have never received a patdown at LHR, CDG or AMS, but they appear to seem to be similar as FRA.

Good luck.

On AA to BA flights from US to UK (via YYZ in Canada) I have had to "re-check-in" my bags and clear security again to get airside at Toronto -- but that may be airport layout related??? -- but no haraSSSSment like treatment in Canada on my flight to Europe. HaraSSSSment, if it were to occur, may happen at the US airports.

While these strategies seem to me a bit extreme, their effectiveness depends on which aspects of US security you object to/are trying to avoid. If you object to the TSA looking at your bags, I suggest that option 2 and/or traveling with only carryon would be most effective.

Transiting Canada will subject you to MORE security than arriving directly in the US, albeit not necessarily from the TSA. International-"transborder" connections (at major airports, anyway) in Canada entail getting your passport examined by Immigration Canada, recovering your luggage, going through Canadian customs, hauling it over to the "transborder" terminal (in YYZ at least, you have to take a shuttle ride), checking in, hauling your luggage through US preclearance and customs, depositing it on the conveyor, and going through Canadian security with your carryons. While Canadian security is in general quite polite and has fewer caprices than the TSA, they're still examining you and your carry-on bags, and presumably examining your checked luggage behind the scenes.

All in all, seems like a huge hassle to shift one small part of the security screening from the TSA to the Canadian security folks but I guess it depends on what you're trying to avoid.

Michael

Thank you. And I also would like to thank everyone who responded.

Perhaps, I should have made my post clearer. I object the most to dump searches of my carry-on and I hate patdowns wth passion! :mad:

So, it seems that Mexico is a better approach as well as avoiding German airports.

While FRA and (spotily) MUC can be a feel-up fest, that's not been my experience at other German airports: TXL and DUS being good examples. Even MUC, as I suggested, is real inconsistent. And this last 31 Dec., FRA was positively lackadaisical. I wouldn't write them off collectively. Maybe fly into FRA and out of MUC??

Also, I've never, ever had my carry-on searched at FRA or MUC, or anywhere outside of the U.S. for that matter. Carry-on snoopiness seems to be a particularly American preoccupation. :rolleyes:

I got the shoe carnival once at MUC about three years ago, the only one I ever experienced outside of the US (including Canada).

You will get the same deal at Mexican airports. If you really want to reduce your chances of a bag dump, fly to YYZ and drive down to BUF.

This preoccupation applies to US-bound flights as I have observed and personally experienced. This is why I am considering the two strategies I outlined in my OP.

I have observed this nonsense only for US-bound flights in Mexico. Here is a really nonsensical example. I once flew from Mexico City to San Diego. The flight had a stop at Los Cabos. So, at Los Cabos they made us deplane with our carry-ons and picked a few for the dump-search. I emphasize: They were dump-searching bags that were on a plane for a couple of hours and never left the sterile area after that :rolleyes: . What purpose could this possible have served?

This is why I am thinking about driving across the Mexico-US border. This could keep me out of reach of the US "security" tentacles.

Should clarify this one. It wasn't a full fledged carnival (with barkers and such), but rather, every 5th or so person was ordered to remove their shoes. I tried to opt for secondary, but it wasn't an option. "Remove your shoes or you don't fly."

Security at YYC told me specifically to keep my shoes on after I absentmindedly began to take them off last Dec. during pre-flight screening on YYC-LAX-SBA; the security officer said that they "don't do this anymore".
I've never had any hassles flying to the US through YYC, and officers seem to be much more pleasant to deal with than they are at YYZ.

Ex-UK/Ireland security is IME pretty much the same as for US flights as flights to South America/intra Europe etc. Usual stuff as in the US although there tends to be more pleasant banter with the TSA and the removing clothes/shoes/jewellery requirements at DUB tend to be more stringent than at US airports. Personally I wouldn't divert from LHR to STN to avoid the "excessive" security never mind go thru MEX etc although I suspect you're merely trying to make a point here.

On a more positive note congratulations on making it out of Cuba. I know many there who are just as keen to experience the freedoms enjoyed in the United States. ^ ^

As long as it isn't the TSA testicles, I think it is good for security. Think of the children!

And of course, one always has the option of simply remaining home if the trauma of one's past makes it impossible to function in public venues.