Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Any Visible ID Changes Yet?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 6, 2008 | 8:01 pm
  #76  
Original Poster
FlyerTalk Evangelist
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,343
Originally Posted by JaggedMind
Inside a #10 security envelope with an affixed First Class stamp?
Good idea....

I think the way to test this is for someone to buy a refundable ticket and show up without a wallet. If they let you through, just walk around for a few minutes and then walk out the exit. If they do hassle you or otherwise violate your civil rights, sue their sorry posteriors.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2008 | 8:14 pm
  #77  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by red456
Where's a good place to hide an ID so it can't be found in a search? As a woman, I know where I would put mine.
Mine will be right inside my pants waist. Very little chance of it being found, even with a pat-down.

My understanding of the TSA's ability to implement such a policy is based on not a ton of knowledge, but on the previously revealed comment that the TSA has the ability to require ID based on existing legislation should they so choose. I'm not so sure that they have the legal right to distinguish between folks who choose to not show ID and folks who lost their ID. That seems very arbitrary and outside the scope of the legislation used to establish the organization. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2008 | 10:04 pm
  #78  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Arizona
Programs: *wood Gold, Marriott Gold, DL Silver, Hilton Silver, F9 Ascent
Posts: 2,419
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
I went through LAX Terminal 6-8 today. I used my official (brown) passport for a domestic destination. No hassles from the dweeb TSA document checker. I even had a paper clip restraining the visa pages, so the only page he could access was the picture. He shined the loupe for a fraction of a second. I grieve for our country.
Are passports printed/produced with a UV reactive feature?
jonesing is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2008 | 11:31 pm
  #79  
Cee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by jonesing
Are passports printed/produced with a UV reactive feature?
The newer ones have the UV reactive feature. Canada has a nice maple leaf on theirs, and the Brits have something (but I forgot what it is).
Cee is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 8:56 am
  #80  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,972
Originally Posted by sbm12
My understanding of the TSA's ability to implement such a policy is based on not a ton of knowledge, but on the previously revealed comment that the TSA has the ability to require ID based on existing legislation should they so choose.
This is the 'secret' law that was at the center of the Gillmore case. In fact (AIUI) there is no specific law pertaining to the TSA and IDs, it's being implemented under the "adminstrator may introduce any measures..." catch-all referred to earlier in this thread.

Any measures ?

That piece of legislation is yet another example of the hasty manner in which the TSA was hatched (spawned is perhaps better), without the ramifications having been thought through. It doesn't specify, hopefully because it's blatantly obvious, that these "measures" can not violate the Constitution. We won't know the answer to that until someone challenges it, and maybe not even then if the courts buckle under to the WOT. Again.
Wally Bird is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 4:49 pm
  #81  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Arizona
Programs: *wood Gold, Marriott Gold, DL Silver, Hilton Silver, F9 Ascent
Posts: 2,419
Originally Posted by JaggedMind
Inside a #10 security envelope with an affixed First Class stamp?
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
Good idea....
Okay I'm going on 3 hours of sleep...at first I thought put the ID in an envelope and mail it (same as FedExing the wallet) but that's not the implication.

So just have it sealed inside an envelope with a stamp affixed but don't mail it? What does that do?

Originally Posted by Cee
The newer ones have the UV reactive feature. Canada has a nice maple leaf on theirs, and the Brits have something (but I forgot what it is).
Yep. Checked the baby's passport out with a UV light.
jonesing is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 5:31 pm
  #82  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SEA
Programs: UA gold
Posts: 264
Originally Posted by jonesing
So just have it sealed inside an envelope with a stamp affixed but don't mail it? What does that do?
I'm not entirely sure, but isn't it illegal for anyone except the recipient, sender, and the USPS (to inspect and/or attempt to determine destination address) to open mail?
dblevitan is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 5:43 pm
  #83  
Princess Cruiser
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Even if they check ID, they don't necessarily know if someone is on the no-fly list or not.

The US government blacklists as they are applied to aviation are quite incompetently managed anyway and their implementation even -- hard as it may be to see -- more retarded.

Have you thought about why are people on a government no-fly list if they aren't guilty enough to be prosecuted for a crime and convicted? This kind of nonsense of denying otherwise free US persons travel rights domestically needs to be re-thought -- actually they need to think first.
My grandson Michael Thomas was stopped at the ticket counter because his name was on the no fly list. My grandson was five years old.
 
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 6:11 pm
  #84  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Gotham City
Programs: Rapid Rewards, Skymiles, HHonors, Amex MR; Browns, Cavs, Indians, and Buckeyes Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Princess Cruiser
My grandson Michael Thomas was stopped at the ticket counter because his name was on the no fly list. My grandson was five years old.
sadly michael is not the only terrorist out there that carries his explosives in a sippy cup...there have been numerous news stories about similar incidents. and it doesn't even seem to bother the TSA...

Originally Posted by dblevitan
I'm not entirely sure, but isn't it illegal for anyone except the recipient, sender, and the USPS (to inspect and/or attempt to determine destination address) to open mail?
where it gets tricky is the authorization...you can authorize me to open your mail, or your secretary, or your SO, neighbor or a bum. or the TSA. i'm not a lawyer, but i wonder if this would hold up, because they might say you have to open the envelope or allow us to do it, or else you can't fly
sammy0623 is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 7:53 pm
  #85  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SEA
Programs: UA gold
Posts: 264
Originally Posted by sammy0623
where it gets tricky is the authorization...you can authorize me to open your mail, or your secretary, or your SO, neighbor or a bum. or the TSA. i'm not a lawyer, but i wonder if this would hold up, because they might say you have to open the envelope or allow us to do it, or else you can't fly
Let's say you did this, they made you let them open it, couldn't you then sue since you were forced under duress?
dblevitan is offline  
Old Jun 7, 2008 | 10:13 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Arizona
Programs: *wood Gold, Marriott Gold, DL Silver, Hilton Silver, F9 Ascent
Posts: 2,419
Originally Posted by dblevitan
I'm not entirely sure, but isn't it illegal for anyone except the recipient, sender, and the USPS (to inspect and/or attempt to determine destination address) to open mail?
Okay, I've had a nap From Wikipedia...
Documents cannot be read by anyone other than the receiver; for instance, in the United States it is a violation of federal law for anyone other than the receiver to open mail. However, exceptions do exist, such as postcards, which can be read by the postman for the purpose of identifying the sender and receiver. For mail contained within an envelope, there are legal provisions in some jurisdictions allowing the recording identities.[13] The privacy of correspondence is guaranteed by the Mexican Constitution, and is alluded to in the European Convention of Human Rights[14] and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[13] According to the laws in the relevant jurisdiction, correspondence may be openly or covertly opened or the contents determined via some other method, by the police or other authorities in some cases relating to their relevance to an alleged or suspected criminal conspiracy, although black chambers (largely in the past, though there is apparently some continuance of their use today) opened and open letters extralegally. Military mail to and from soldiers on active deployment is more often subject to strict censorship. International mail and packages are subjects to customs control.
Also, as eluded on the other no ID-no fly thread, a government agency (TSA, police) would need probable cause and a warrant to open US mail. hmmmm I wonder who would win in a showdown: TSA or the US Postal Inspection Service?


Originally Posted by Princess Cruiser
My grandson Michael Thomas was stopped at the ticket counter because his name was on the no fly list. My grandson was five years old.
Supposedly, children under X years of age are supposed to be automatically de-selected as SSSS by the airline agent. (X=10?)
jonesing is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008 | 1:19 am
  #87  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Programs: United Milage Plus 1K. Lots of hotel Gold.
Posts: 299
Sorry to disagree, but unless its actually mailed, and thus in the possession of the USPS, it's not mail. Simply putting it into an envelope and affixing a stamp does not make it mail. It makes it an envelope that is intended to be mailed, but not yet applicable to the rules below.

Originally Posted by jonesing
Okay, I've had a nap From Wikipedia...
Documents cannot be read by anyone other than the receiver; for instance, in the United States it is a violation of federal law for anyone other than the receiver to open mail. However, exceptions do exist, such as postcards, which can be read by the postman for the purpose of identifying the sender and receiver. For mail contained within an envelope, there are legal provisions in some jurisdictions allowing the recording identities.[13] The privacy of correspondence is guaranteed by the Mexican Constitution, and is alluded to in the European Convention of Human Rights[14] and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[13] According to the laws in the relevant jurisdiction, correspondence may be openly or covertly opened or the contents determined via some other method, by the police or other authorities in some cases relating to their relevance to an alleged or suspected criminal conspiracy, although black chambers (largely in the past, though there is apparently some continuance of their use today) opened and open letters extralegally. Military mail to and from soldiers on active deployment is more often subject to strict censorship. International mail and packages are subjects to customs control.
Also, as eluded on the other no ID-no fly thread, a government agency (TSA, police) would need probable cause and a warrant to open US mail. hmmmm I wonder who would win in a showdown: TSA or the US Postal Inspection Service?



Supposedly, children under X years of age are supposed to be automatically de-selected as SSSS by the airline agent. (X=10?)
jello2594 is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008 | 1:50 am
  #88  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Gotham City
Programs: Rapid Rewards, Skymiles, HHonors, Amex MR; Browns, Cavs, Indians, and Buckeyes Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 2,027
no offense to those that have responded to my thoughts on the opening of the letter (which of course holds your DL, proving not only that you can drive, but that you're not a terrorist), but to the many lawyers on here, how does something like this play out in your mind?
sammy0623 is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008 | 8:49 am
  #89  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 63
Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Well, as I speculated elsewhere, I believe in the next 3-5 years we'll move to some sort of registered traveler program in which screening will be greatly expedited, if not eliminated altogether, for participants.

The key to making this work is to be able to identify passengers with a high degree of accuracy. I believe what we're seeing now is TSA's attempts to "get the bugs out of the system" before any drastic, and potentially risky, changes are implemented.
Well the US already has some form of this already (the registered part anyways). Passengers flying into the country are required to register to enter. I always have to supply my advance passenger information that informs the government of the exact street address of where I'll be staying, my passport number, gender, date of expiration, birthday, full name etc. If I don't supply it, I won't be allowed to fly. What I really dislike about it, other than the obvious, is that the information is supplied to the airlines. How safe is my information when it's associated with my PNR?
daeira is offline  
Old Jun 8, 2008 | 9:37 am
  #90  
Cee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by sammy0623
...where it gets tricky is the authorization...you can authorize me to open your mail, or your secretary, or your SO, neighbor or a bum. or the TSA. i'm not a lawyer, but i wonder if this would hold up, because they might say you have to open the envelope or allow us to do it, or else you can't fly
You guys are really getting yourselves worked up over a hypothetical situation! We don't open mail...we aren't going to open your mail. Have you ever had a TSO open your mail, or have you ever heard of a TSO opening up mail during a secondary screening? If you are like me, you probably pay your bills online, and you probably have a bunch of return envelopes laying around. Put your ID in one of those. Put your ID in a peanut butter & jelly sandwhich...
Cee is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.