More on the Hassles (or Worse) of Flying
---
Quite a busy week in air travel news.
ITEM: I casually asked recently why anyone wouldn't pay $28 (or, for that matter, $100) to become a registered traveler with the TSA and thereby avoid at least some of the hassle of airport security. Well, 27B Stroke 6 has the answer:
---
ITEM: Speaking of security, you may have seen by now this ubiquitous picture:
Such images may become routine for at least some "extra screening" passengers at certain airports. Which is not to say that they're terrorists, or actual or intended lawbreakers in any sense. One quote caught my eye:
On the other hand, the TSA insists that the images will not be stored in any way and that those selected for additional screening will have the option — for now — of submitting to a traditional pat-down instead of the "nude-o-meter." But on the other other hand, then why bother? And how much will these machines cost? And who's paying for it? The mantra endures: It is better to feel safe than to be safe.
More thoughts from PHB, Windypundit.
---
ITEM: If at first you don't succeed, spy spy again --
Who hasn't ever had an error on their credit report? (And keep in mind, incidentally, that a credit report is, at least nominally, reflective of purely voluntary activity. Every entity that reports on you received, at some point, your contractual consent to do so.) And even when you can identify, promptly, a mistake in your credit report, it is neither easy, fast nor costless to correct it. What, exactly, are you supposed to do if bad data gets onto your ATS report? (And consider the kind of data: "where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meal they ordered" [sic!].)
Now here's the truly delicious irony of the ATS outrage: circle back to the first item in this post — the registered traveler idiocy. There are those of us — myself included — who would love nothing more than to reveal ourselves to the TSA (in credit terms, that is, not the nude-o-meter), if (and it's a big "if") it would get us some sort of expedited process at the airport. I would gladly proclaim, to the TSA or to anyone else, that I am in fact not a terrorist if I were rewarded for doing so. It seems like a perfectly round-peg-in-round-hole solution, which I suppose is precisely why the TSA can't see that.
More thoughts from Concurring Opinions, South by Southwest.
ITEM: I casually asked recently why anyone wouldn't pay $28 (or, for that matter, $100) to become a registered traveler with the TSA and thereby avoid at least some of the hassle of airport security. Well, 27B Stroke 6 has the answer:
Then after a traveler gets her boarding pass the normal way and heads toward the security checkpoint ... she goes immediately to the front of the screening line. Then she goes through screening as normal — with their liquids in a bag, laptop out of its case, shoes off, etc. So, what's the point of a background check if all you get is a better place in the same line you would have been without the card?Good point, especially when some airports (e.g., Las Vegas) already have an express line at security for First Class travelers. If you're going to pay extra, then why not go all out? So much for that idea.
---
ITEM: Speaking of security, you may have seen by now this ubiquitous picture:
Such images may become routine for at least some "extra screening" passengers at certain airports. Which is not to say that they're terrorists, or actual or intended lawbreakers in any sense. One quote caught my eye:
The technology already is being used in prisons and by drug enforcement agents, and has been tested at London's Heathrow Airport.So now air travelers, even those who "only" fail (almost always innocently) the magnetometer screening are still considered the functional equivalent of prison inmates and drug dealers. Splendid.
On the other hand, the TSA insists that the images will not be stored in any way and that those selected for additional screening will have the option — for now — of submitting to a traditional pat-down instead of the "nude-o-meter." But on the other other hand, then why bother? And how much will these machines cost? And who's paying for it? The mantra endures: It is better to feel safe than to be safe.
More thoughts from PHB, Windypundit.
---
ITEM: If at first you don't succeed, spy spy again --
The Associated Press reported Thursday that millions of Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders in the past four years have been assessed by the computerized Automated Targeting System, or ATS, designed to help pick out terrorists or criminals.Once again 27B Stroke 6 provides the proper historical context:
The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years. Under specific circumstances, some or all data in the system can be shared with state, local and foreign governments and even some private contractors.
A similar system which would have rated every domestic passenger by their perceived threat level as Red, Yellow, or Green, was killed off by the government in 2004 after it rankled officials on all sides of the political spectrum.You know a government program is out of control when even "the government" can't shut it down.
...
The AP's big splash today is in recognizing the significance of the fact that this system has been ongoing for years.
Who hasn't ever had an error on their credit report? (And keep in mind, incidentally, that a credit report is, at least nominally, reflective of purely voluntary activity. Every entity that reports on you received, at some point, your contractual consent to do so.) And even when you can identify, promptly, a mistake in your credit report, it is neither easy, fast nor costless to correct it. What, exactly, are you supposed to do if bad data gets onto your ATS report? (And consider the kind of data: "where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meal they ordered" [sic!].)
Now here's the truly delicious irony of the ATS outrage: circle back to the first item in this post — the registered traveler idiocy. There are those of us — myself included — who would love nothing more than to reveal ourselves to the TSA (in credit terms, that is, not the nude-o-meter), if (and it's a big "if") it would get us some sort of expedited process at the airport. I would gladly proclaim, to the TSA or to anyone else, that I am in fact not a terrorist if I were rewarded for doing so. It seems like a perfectly round-peg-in-round-hole solution, which I suppose is precisely why the TSA can't see that.
More thoughts from Concurring Opinions, South by Southwest.
Related Posts (on one page):
Posted by Kip on
3 December 2006
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.
