Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Commenters attack snarky TSA blogger
The TSA blog: I read it so you don't have to.
- One commenter wonders whether the "No Fly List" isn't more trouble than it's worth: "What kind of threat do they pose if they have already been screened for weapons? They going to punch a hole in the plane?"
- Chris (the TSA blogger) writes in the comments that his original snark was merely an attempt "to bring some levity to a long drawn-out discussion of a serious matter while providing some insight into why we think ID is important." Another commenter responds: "Christopher, while I understand your intent, you did not succed at either of your goals. Address the hard queston with some real answers, let Leno and Letterman handle the comedy."
Questions to ponder next time you're waiting to hand over your ID at the airport:
- "Why is a guy who says he lost his ID less dangerous than a guy who says he prefers not to show his ID?"
- "I show up a the airport and say I forgot my ID, because I have memory loss. You ask me questions I can´t answer because I have memory loss. Can I fly?"
- "Let´s say I turn up at an airport and say I forgot my ID, and that my name is John Smith. There are probably a few thousand John Smiths. How will you 'establish my identity'?"
Finally, here's a lengthy but incisive comment from one Trollkiller.
"If the TSA lawyers are so cock sure of the legality of this new policy then that means they have done the research on it. The information I am asking for should be on hand and easily retrievable.
All I am asking for is the TSA lawyers to show their work. Believe it or not, I would much rather be proven wrong than to think that an agency of MY government is knowingly perpetrating an illegal act on 2,000,000 people a day.
I have repeatedly stated my argument clearly, citing the section of the law that I believe disallows the forced ID check to be used as a criterion for granting access to a sterile area.
You are pretending that I am just sitting on the web with my tin foil hat screaming "it's wrong, just wrong, it's a conspiracy man, they are out to get us...." That is just silly, we all know it is the tin foil underwear that protects us.
All silliness aside, Christopher, I have done all the work for the TSA lawyers. They don't have to guess at what I am asking...
The definitions in Title 49 Part 1540 § 1540.5 limit screening to a search and inspection FOR weapons, explosives, and incendiaries as THE condition for granting access to a sterile area.
Adding a forced ID check as a criterion for granting access to a sterile area is not permitted as it falls outside the search and inspection FOR weapons, explosives, and incendiaries.
I am going by the section of law that YOU cited as justification for the TSA's illegal act. You can not keep part of the law and discard the part you don't like."
Well said! This is, in case you couldn't already tell, the best comment thread ever. Sorry, Gadling faithful.
Filed under: Activism, United States, Airports
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Emma Leigh Jul 10th 2008 11:22AM
My local airport is ORF and they have always checked ID prior to entering checkpoint. It isn't done by TSA, rather the private company that used to do the checkpoint screening.
A worker sits at a podium and matches ID to the boarding pass. I guess by your 2 posts and the TSA blogger that this isn't the norm. I suppose the Federal Security Director at each airport decides if it is necessary.
I don't understand why people are so adamant against it. The reason old ladies are searched it because they could be a mule for terrorists. The same theorgy applies to the ID. If someone is a person of interest on the suspected terrorist list then he might convince someone else to reserve the ticket and check in to the point of obtaining the boarding pass. Then all that has to be done is to hand over the pass to the other person and there is a breech in security.
If it would make folks feel better, why don't the airlines check ID prior to boarding? Would it feel less like an authoritarian state if a private company asked you to prove your identity before boarding their plane?
Eva Jul 10th 2008 2:30PM
I've been enjoying these posts, Aaron - I always love a good laugh at the expense of the TSA and its thin-skinned blogger. But am I being dim, not understanding what the problem is? I mean, you show your ID at check-in, you show your ID at customs (if you're flying internationally) and you show your ID at boarding - at least that's been the case in Canada since 9/11. So why the fuss about showing ID at security?
Trollkiller Jul 11th 2008 7:34AM
Thank you Aaron for including my comments and for your kind words. I feel like a celebrity.
To Emma Leigh & Eva,
Before the new forced ID verification policy, a passenger had the option to refuse to show ID. If the passenger refused to show ID they were subjected to a more strenuous screening for weapons, explosives and incendiaries, a policy that was both reasonable and legal.
The reasons for the fuss and why so many are adamant against the new policy is multi fold. First, the constitutional issue of the right of free travel. Since the Articles of the Confederation, free travel has been a bedrock right of an American. The forced ID verification is contrary to the historical court affirmations of this right as it can unduly restrict free travel at a TSO's whim.
Secondly, the new forced ID policy is illegal. The legislative branch of our Government is comprised mostly of lawyers, I have full confidence that Congress can write a law to say exactly what they mean. In this case I have not found any law that allows the TSA to force an ID verification. No matter how well intended, willfully breaking the law is not proper for any Government entity.
Third, the new forced ID verification is a waste of scarce resources. By the TSA's own admission approximately 300 people a day, out of 2,000,000 per day were without ID or refused to show it. That is less than one person per airport with a TSA presence. The cost of just up to date data from private companies is enormous, ask anyone that sends junk mail. The TSA can't buy a targeted list but has to purchase data on every person living in America. Why spend that kind of money on such a minuscule subset of passengers when you can simply give them a more thorough search and stay within the bounds of the law. The TSA is opening themselves up to a costly court challenge on not only the statutory validity of the policy but also the constitutional validity.
The forced ID verification does not increase security, it is illegal, and it is costly. Remember the money they waste is yours.
I hope that cleared things up.
libertylover Jul 23rd 2008 6:35AM
I appreciate Trollkiller's valiant battle against a bureaucracy's forcing supposedly free people to show ID. But let me suggest that we should be equally opposed to the TSA's warrantless, mass searches. They may be legal, but they are grossly anti-constitutional. They interfere with and restrict travel; the Feds also use them to ferret out all sorts of things besides weapons: fake ID, drugs, illegal aliens, folks carrying more cash than the govt thinks we shd (obviously, you're a drug dealer if you like a full wad in your pocket when you travel), even sportsmen shipping trophies home who've exceeded fish and game regulations. Our friends and neighbors are being "detained" and some have even gone to jail thanks to the TSA. Chillingly, the TSA has also quelled political protest---and not just the famous "Kip Hawley is an idiot" episode, either. It has "detained" several critics of the Administration, forcing them to miss flights to anti-war protests or hassling them for books or articles they've written.
The only answer is to abolish the TSA. No free country should allow government agents to bully, harrass, spy on, and detain people as the TSA has done for six years now. Remember that we're paying these cretins to pester us, too, to the tune of $6 billion annually. Let the airlines provide their own security, as they see fit---security that would actually protect their passengers and inventory rather than merely give that illusion, security as invisible as that at malls, supermarkets, and other businesses that consider us customers, not criminals.
Trollkiller Jul 25th 2008 5:16AM
Libertylover, I personally do not have a problem with the TSA searching for weapons, explosives and incendiaries, if the search is reasonable. The TSA can look in my wallet for a weapon, but they have no right to read the love letter from my wife.
I do believe that the majority of searches conducted by the TSA are constitutional, as they are reasonable. In a case where a TSO crosses the line, the punishment should be swift and severe.
It seems to make sense that an airline would be more vigilant because of the great expense of losing a plane, but if you look at the lack of maintenance they try to get away with you will see that safety is not their priority.
Unfortunately we need the TSA (or similar), aircraft are spectacular targets, if you can bring just one down you will stop all air travel for at least two days causing a huge hit on the economy.
We should not disband the TSA, just fix it so it offers real security. No more unguarded luggage, no more dangerous Pilot ID programs, no more unscreened cargo.