Oh now I'm really screwed, I forgot to do that as well. No wonder why I could not find St Augustine (SGJ).

http://map6.flightaware.com/flight_t...ime=1233085250

Law Dawg started this thread by asking:
Spiff answered with one example:
Law Dawg, seemingly attempting to minimize the inappropriate nature of TSA's airport ID policy, responded:
In response, I explained why we are required to carry proof of identification and driver licensing when operating a moving vehicle on public roads:
I also responded to Law Dawg's example of loans and home purchases:
Confusingly, Law Dawg responded to my point about driver licensing with:
Law Dawg, I think you've made a false comparison, but I don't quite understand you.

In essence, I said, "That we are required to carry proof of driver license when we drive does not support the idea that we should be required to identify ourselves when riding as a passenger in an airplane. With both motor vehicles and airplanes, we require licensing when someone wishes to operate the machinery in a public place, but no license is required to ride as a passenger in either case." I didn't say anything about regulating airspace.

Could you please rephrase your previous comment?

I'm not explaining myself well - wish I could blame it on booze. :)

We require IDs to drive for public safety. You have to pass a test to establish a minimum standard of proficiency.

We also require IDs to take to the skies in conveyances that could cause serious damage. Public safety again. The G wants to know who is up in it's airspace.

Two caveats-

1- This is a total SWAG on my part. I'm assuming this because there's no kind of screening requirement for any other type of travel. We don't show ID or are screened for buses, subways, etc. The only thing that separates these conveyances is method of travel. Airspace is much more important than roadways security-wise.

2- My normal caveat that I'm wrong around 80% of the time so take it all with a grain of salt.

1) The TSA will smash open locks (breaking your private property) and confiscate items (stealing your private property) during checked luggage searches that occur out of your sight.

2) There are sometimes "random" searches at the gate, even after all the other searches.

3) Non-passengers are prevented from entering the majority of terminals to see passengers off or meet them coming in.

(The irony is that we have no constitutional protection in Australia, yet we can travel ID-free and without any of the above intrusions, because they would be unacceptable.)

Good points, although didn't pre-9/11 security also break locks?

But excellent points all. Hmmmm....

I'm still confused law dawg, who was I supposed to show my ID to at Miami (OPF) before filing the flight plan I did not file anyway? And when the passenger boarded in North Florida (I've never met him before), was I supposed to ID him and compare his name to the super-duper official TSA watch-list?

The aircraft had 2700 lbs of kerosene, heavens on what might-have/could-have happened. I did not realize that TSA had such total lack of control (in spite of their efforts) on the US airspace.

I'm still lost on your premise that air travel requires the showing of ID for public safety. You, like the TSA, come up with poor-sounding excuses rather than actual facts. I strongly suggest you use the "R" in research before using the "W" in write, you'll look a lot less foolish here.

No. And initially, the checked luggage screening was set up in public areas in many airports, just as had happened in airports around the world, such as SIN, for decades before. You could still watch the process, provide keys if necessary, and be sure your bags were re-locked before departure. The TSA gradually moved all the screening out of public spaces, making it less efficient and impossible to monitor, plus subjecting passengers to huge risks when travelling internationally (esp. to countries with poor security on incoming baggage).

Actually, the identification part is secondary. What we do in this case to increase public safety is require drivers to be licensed in order to drive in public places. People confuse driver licensing with identification because it is so common for people to be licensed to drive, and the document we provide them to use for proof of their licensing happens to be useful for convincing someone of their identity.

I think you're confusing things. We require airplane pilots and motor vehicle drivers to be licensed to fly or drive. We don't require passengers in either case to have any license.

Let's clarify something: identification is a process, not an object. "ID", short for "identification," is used colloquially to refer to credentials -- documentation of identity -- but that's not what it really means. TSA requires people to identify themselves before passing its security checkpoints, but it does not require them to present any credentials that can be used in the process of identification.

Although TSA repeatedly attempts to misinform people about its policy, we are not required to present any documentation of our identities prior to flying as passengers on commercial flights. As of June, 2008, we are required to identify ourselves at airport checkpoints, either by presenting acceptable documentation or by cooperating in an interrogation.

Ah. Didn't know that. I only flew a handful of times pre-9/11 and I never checked bags.

In fact, in all the flying I've done I've only checked bags twice so I'm not familiar with that part of the process.

Sir,

Can you please point to any of my posts where I've spoken to you in a disrespectful manner or insulted you. If you can't point any out then I'll ask you to show me the same courtesy.

I have opinions here but I'm looking for other opinions to better inform myself. I never claimed to have any kind of monopoly on anything. I don't deal with airline screening so a lot of things that happen in that arena I'm ignorant of. I try to learn and ask questions about them. So my opinions and feelings on the issue are malleable. In my area I'm an expert. Security screening isn't it.

But if you come at me with an attitude then I'm more likely to ignore you. I doesn't help your case.

Would you like to me show you how to enable the "ignore" function?

You make comments here that are incorrect and continue to make the same statement even after factually it is shown how you are incorrect on that item. In fact I don't recall reading your comment about a TSA aviation security inspector deciding to search your home to see how many US citizens versus non-US citizens you have dealt with. Object to the search, no problem only a $10k fine.

Better still your explanation if an individual TSA screener (or aviation security inspector) does something unconstitutional, that is the error of the individual not the agency such as the TSA. Sounds good except the TSA actually has published these rules and those "individuals" (a lot of them at the same time/same place by the way) were following those very rules. But heaven forbid that we say what the TSA is doing is unconstitutional, just the actions of those who are following those rules.

But I can suggest if you wish to make comments on how "ID is required for air travel whether operator or passenger", here is a link to the FAA web site which contrary to the TSA, does indeed publish all of its regulations that it holds the public accountable to.

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...1.3.10&idno=14

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.1.2&idno=14

Please let me know where you find that ID is required prior to operating an aircraft or even boarding an aircraft. And of course your question I really liked, where a flight plan is required.

TSAdude1 has actually called me before on an issue that he disagreed with. Perhaps you could do the same and I'll step you thru on the phone how to set your forum preferences to ignore of my postings. That way you won't feel offended in a truthful delivery of facts rather than "well this is what I think".

^

Furthermore, despite all these unidentified people with large liquids in their carry-ons, shoes on their feet and properly locked bags in the hold, there isn't the massive carnage predicted by TSA in such circumstances. :confused:

It has nothing to do with the veracity of your post but asinine comments like "I strongly suggest you use the "R" in research before using the "W" in write, you'll look a lot less foolish here. "

But I don't need you to show me how to use the ignore function. It's done. Have the greatest life ever.

Do enjoy your day. One caveat though, when someone quotes one of my replies to you it will still show up. So be very careful in reading quoted replies it might be one of mine.

Too bad they consider the intrusion on your gun rights acceptable :/