A Day in the Life of Checkpoint Evolution at BWI
Just like scientists strap cameras to wildebeests in the Serengeti, we have strapped a camera to a passenger. For the first time ever, you’ll be able to see exactly what a passenger sees as they walk through their brand new checkpoint at BWI. Watch as the passenger winds through the blue glow of the quiet jungle of machines. It’s like you’re actually there.
Listen to what passengers and Transportation Security Officers have to say about the new checkpoint.
Learn about the new passenger engagement training our Transportation Security Officers are receiving.
Read more about Checkpoint Evolution.
Thanks,
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Labels: innovation, mission
posted by Bob at
6:42 PM
Subscribe in a reader
93 Comments:
Good videos! Now I have a pleasant checkpoint experience to look forward to the next time I visit Baltimore or Washington. Now I hope the next step of the evolution would be to install liquid explosive detectors (they already exist anyway but no airport has them). It would eliminate the need for the inane 3-1-1 rule. This should be instituted at other airports as well.
June 5, 2008 7:41 PM
The first 30 seconds of the first video reminded me of the news today about cutbacks among the major airlines. I hope that you are able to institute the positive aspects of this program across all of the check points that you serve.
June 5, 2008 10:07 PM
41 million fewer flights thanks to the hassles involved in flying these days. TSA: Doing its part to hurt the economy since its inception!
June 5, 2008 11:14 PM
Interesting -- sounds like the TSA figured out it's a good idea to STOP THE YELLING. (Oops -- stop the yelling.)
Now if they can just get the screeners in Orlando to speak intelligible English....
June 6, 2008 8:26 AM
Are you comparing passengers to wildebeast?
June 6, 2008 9:30 AM
First video shows some of my common complaints: rows and rows of zig zagging even when there's no line.
I didn't see the "passenger" put his/her shoes into the x-ray.
The "passenger" was not offered the choice of the new imaging machine versus a wanding & pat-down. Didn't you make a big deal about the fact that the passengers have the choice? And the fact that most people chose the scan? If they didn't know there was a choice, then you can't claim that most passengers made a choice.
Are there convenient seats to stop and put your shoes back on?
June 6, 2008 11:06 AM
Why isn't there anything up there on the blog discussing any of the ID issues, including this
http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/enhance_id_requirements.shtm
which prohibits people who willfully decide to not produce identification (but allows for those who have lost their id) from boarding?
Its not like the ID's are checked against a giant terrorist database that each TSO has memorized.
June 6, 2008 11:44 AM
Might be just a touch disingenuous to declare that the person holding the camera is a passenger. True, while the process (except for the TDC; that was so shoddy as to be shameful - more on that later) is more or less the same as for what passengers go through, that was clearly an employee of TSA.
When the lady reached the TDC position, she handed their boarding pass (or, more likely, just the ticket sleeve) and ID to the TDC officer, who promptly declared "Okay!" and then she went on her way.
The ID is clearly a US Government-issued Transportation Security Administration badge. The shameful part comes in that the TDC screener didn't even pretend to verify the authenticity of the ID, checking neither with light or loupe, both of which would've shown specific security features on the ID.
Tsk.
If yinz are going to go out of your way to make a video, could you at least try to make it accurate as to what happens on the checkpoint?
The public will appreciate it more, and the screeners will be able to back it up.
Otherwise, the video seems pretty straightforward on what to expect going through a checkpoint. Can't wait until the Evolution rolls out at our airport. I've been working around the same scenery for six years now, and it's starting to get downright dull.
June 6, 2008 12:15 PM
Anonymous said...
Are you comparing passengers to wildebeest?
Have you ever watched a show about wildebeest? Pretty accurate description. From the African Wildlife Foundation web site.
"The famous Serengeti population of wildebeest is a very large nomadic group. These animals make a migratory circle of 500 to 1,000 miles each year"
Wildebeest are noisy creatures. Bulls have an array of loud vocalizations, from moans to explosive snorts.
For the most part wildebeest will follow the leader, but just like airline passengers there is always that one that will buck the system.
June 6, 2008 1:16 PM
To all the pax who were saying that the lines were short: I assume that's because TSA has significantly increased staffing at this checkpoint. Just wait until they bring it back down!
June 6, 2008 1:51 PM
Annonymous said: "Now if they can just get the screeners in Orlando to speak intelligible English...."
Add Miami airport to that request. I´d be happy if they spoke any English, even unintelligible.
June 6, 2008 3:02 PM
Trollkiller - the one (wildebeast) that bucks the system normally gets eaten..
June 6, 2008 4:19 PM
Easy folks. No need to get riled up. This was a dry run. Think about it, would we really allow somebody to go through the entire screening process with a camera strapped to them? Once again, this was another one of my attempts at humor. It was a live checkpoint though with actual passengers.
As far as comparing passengers to wildebeests, that wasn't my intention, but Trollkiller did a good job selling it. I almost went with wild bores...
Bob
EoS Blog Team
June 6, 2008 4:27 PM
From TSA.gov
Beginning Saturday, June 21, 2008 passengers that willfully refuse to provide identification at security checkpoint will be denied access to the secure area of airports. This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity.
This new procedure will not affect passengers that may have misplaced, lost or otherwise do not have ID but are cooperative with officers.
So.... You still don't need id to fly, but you have to actually have lost it to fly... or you need to be under 18... Or perhaps I misplaced it in my backpack and I can't find it...
Seriously, are TSA "officers" now going to spend time looking for an drivers license in the bottom of passengers bags? I can only imagine the scenareo.
"ID and Boarding Pass"
"Here you go"
"Where's the ID?"
"It's lost"
"I'll have to examine the contents of your wallet and all the papers, compartments, creases and folds of your clothing and carry-on to determine if you actually have an id conceled on you."
"But I now have a limit-testing carry-on in my possession because the airline is charging $15 for checking a bag. Your administrative search will take forever."
"Too bad citizen, the rules are the rules. Without an appropriate piece of plastic with your name and face on it, or a legitimate description of how and where you lost, damaged or destroyed your id, I can't let you into the secure area of the airport. It is for your own safety."
"Hmm. I feel safer now."
Seriously, Now we are not just subject to retaliatory secondary searches, but denied the ability to travel via air within the United States because of the whim/decree of TSA personnel.
June 6, 2008 4:53 PM
Anonymous said...
Trollkiller - the one (wildebeast) that bucks the system normally gets eaten..
On the contrary, he is the one that lives. The one that bucks the system completely freaks out the predators so they don't want to eat him because they think he is mad as a hatter.
BTW even though it makes no sense wildebeest is the proper spelling. I only know this because the spellchecker caught it and I had to look it up.
June 6, 2008 4:59 PM
Hey Bobby - when are we going to see a post addressing the anti-freedom of travel initiative requirement of showing ID?
Several court cases, including some from the USC have validated that US citizens have the right to unimpeded travel in the 50 United States. How does this new requirement square with those rulings?
Welcome to the new United States of Communist America. Please present your internal passport for travel authorization. Can you document permission to travel today?
June 6, 2008 5:14 PM
Bob said...
As far as comparing passengers to wildebeests, that wasn't my intention, but Trollkiller did a good job selling it. I almost went with wild bores...
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Wild BORES would be an oxymoron.
Bore: One that is wearingly dull, repetitive, or tedious.
Boar: Pig.
Wait a sec.... just what ARE you saying??? ;-)
June 6, 2008 5:27 PM
"I almost went with wild bores..."
Hey Bob, is that an intentional misspelling? (It's quite funny if it is.)
June 6, 2008 6:36 PM
I see from the TSA press release (http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/enhance_id_requirements.shtm) that travelers who refuse on principle to show their ID will not be allowed through security.
I hope the new, enhanced checkpoints will include language instruction so the TSA employees will be able to properly pronounce, "Papiere, Bitte." You probably should discard the new, blue uniforms and move to the brown shirt look while your at it, too.
T-the-B at flyertalk
June 6, 2008 8:08 PM
DHS/TSA's new rule that a person who wishes to not display ID will not be allow to pass the checkpoint demonstrates without question that your leaders have no concern for citizens rights.
The ability to move about this country unmolested, freely and without having to display papers was a hallmark of being an American.
Much like Nazi Germany, East Germany in more recent times and the old USSR that required travel documents, DHS/TSA has decided that we Americans movements must be controlled and only allowed if you take no exception.
This is not freedom! It is tyranny and will not stand!
I spent 23 years of my life defending this country against Communist and socialist governments only to have a home grown crop come to power here.
This is truly a sad day for democracy and the history of the United States of America.
Commrade Chertoff, Commrade Hawley and all TSA employees, you earn my salute;
Sieg Heil!!
May God save the United States from the misquided actions you have brought!
June 6, 2008 10:35 PM
Bob said, "Think about it, would we really allow somebody to go through the entire screening process with a camera strapped to them?"
Why not Bob, just what would the camera see?
TSO's abusing travelers?
TSO's standing around without a clue?
Just what is so secret at one of your checkpoints that I can view it with my eyes but not record it on film?
Just what does TSA have to hide that they are afraid of citizens seeing?
Not so transparent as you make out!
June 6, 2008 10:39 PM
Anonymous said... Bob said, "Think about it, would we really allow somebody to go through the entire screening process with a camera strapped to them?"
Why not Bob, just what would the camera see?
TSO's abusing travelers?
TSO's standing around without a clue?
Just what is so secret at one of your checkpoints that I can view it with my eyes but not record it on film?
Just what does TSA have to hide that they are afraid of citizens seeing?
Not so transparent as you make out!
June 6, 2008 10:39 PM
OK, you can take off your tin foil hat now.
Think about it. You're taking it in the wrong direction.
It's not what you can see with a camera, it's what you can conceal in a camera.
Watch the video again. Do you ever once see the camera inspected? Nope...
Bob
EoS Blog Team
June 6, 2008 11:22 PM
re:
OK, you can take off your tin foil hat now.
Sure, and your agency just made travel papers a requirement.
What is so sad is your going along for the ride. Are you blind?
June 6, 2008 11:35 PM
IDisn'tSecurity said...
Why isn't there anything up there on the blog discussing any of the ID issues
Let me help you out with the link.
June 7, 2008 12:47 AM
Anonymous: 41 million fewer flights thanks to the hassles involved in flying these days. TSA: Doing its part to hurt the economy since its inception!
Pre-"9/11" security was an absolute joke and everybody knew it. Oh boy, contracted "security" firms -- glorified mall security guards -- watching over our nation's airports. Half those firms didn't care either..their eyes were on the bottom line and would hire just about anybody. Anything could be better than that. They were practically letting just about anybody walk on a plane with anything...and one day they did just that.
At least a real federal agency is thinking very closely about the entire security problem, standardizing security, hiring quality personal (and paying them the living wage they deserve), and making an attempt to improve passenger experience (which is rare for a federal agency).
The TSA is not perfect, and any security is going to inconvenience a traveler. If you just ignored the security problem, i am certain there would be a whole lot more than 43 million fewer flights....
June 7, 2008 12:58 AM
"This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity."
And who is to decide who isn't being "cooperative?" A rookie TSO having a bad day? Come on, TSA. You've got to be kidding me. We have freedom of movement in this country. I've paid my taxes to pay for the TSA and the FAA. My local tax dollars keep the airport open. I've purchased a seat on the airplane. Give me my SSSS and move on.
June 7, 2008 3:51 AM
casey said...
Pre-"9/11" security was an absolute joke and everybody knew it. Oh boy, contracted "security" firms -- glorified mall security guards -- watching over our nation's airports. Half those firms didn't care either..their eyes were on the bottom line and would hire just about anybody. Anything could be better than that. They were practically letting just about anybody walk on a plane with anything...and one day they did just that.
At least a real federal agency is thinking very closely about the entire security problem, standardizing security, hiring quality personal (and paying them the living wage they deserve), and making an attempt to improve passenger experience (which is rare for a federal agency).
The TSA is not perfect, and any security is going to inconvenience a traveler. If you just ignored the security problem, i am certain there would be a whole lot more than 43 million fewer flights....
Before you start throwing stones at the pre 9/11 screeners lets look at some of the quality people the TSA has hired.
Arrested for having sex with a child.
Arrested for one count of third-degree grand theft, one count of making a false or misleading statement for issuance of a state handicapped permit and one count of cheating. (Felony)
Accused of faking his military record. (Federal Offense)
Those three stories were from the last couple of weeks. The next story gives tips to prevent the TSOs from stealing your stuff. It also tells about the 200 TSOs that have been fired for theft.
If the weekly news stories are to be believed, the TSA background checks are a joke. The TSA is as guilty as the private companies when it comes to "hiring just anybody".
You say the TSA is "thinking very closely about the entire security problem". Thinking does NOT equal doing.
If thinking equaled doing, luggage would not be so easily tampered with.
If thinking equaled doing, the TSA would be employing explosive detection puffers.
If thinking equaled doing, there would NOT be a pilot program to do an ID ONLY screen for pilots.
If thinking equaled doing, the TSA would be placing the money wasted on fancy lights, background music and faux cop uniforms into REAL security measures.
If thinking equaled doing, my hazardous water would not be tossed in a non bombproof container.
Do you see a pattern?
As for the rarity of a Government agency trying to improve the customer experience, don't fool yourself. The TSA is not doing it out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it because people like me won't shut up. The TSA has reached its limit when it comes to the goodwill of the public.
Of course loosing $102,500,000 in security fees because of people driving instead of flying so they don't have to deal with the TSA helps to push them in the right direction.
The TSA is run by career bureaucrats, they are more worried what a new administration will do then they are about what a terrorist will do.
Why do you think there has been a sudden surge in new equipment, uniforms, programs and over reaching policies? Could it be that the career bureaucrats know that it is harder to kill a program once it is in place?
The TSA is about job security not transportation security. Knowing the odds of another 9/11 style attack is remote the TSA is setting itself up to be the national dragnet agency. Why else do you think they would be requiring IDs? Right now the TSO checking the ID has NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING, to compare it to. Do you think they can remember everybody on the no fly list?
So why the ID check? Maybe it has something to do with the $2 BILLION IT contract. Is the TSA's plan to cross check every ID against every law enforcement database? Is it going to cross check IDs against people that post negative comments about the TSA on the internet?
How far do we let them go under the disguise of security? Remember the TSA is over ALL transportation. At what point will they find the need to expand into other areas?
People like you have the attitude that if you don't want to deal with the TSA then don't fly. Next it will be if you don't want to deal with the TSA don't take the train, then the bus, the ferry, the boats and finally the cars and bicycles.
You may think I am being funny but ALL those above mentioned transportation devices have been used by terrorists in the past so I can assume they will be used by them in the future.
How far do we allow the TSA to go? At what point will we as a people say enough is enough?
Everyone on this blog wants security, everyone on this blog wants to stop terrorists. Not everyone on this blog is a terrorist and we need to STOP being treated as such.
The TSA needs to STOP trying to push the limits of what is allowed by the courts. There is no need to violate the spirit and the letter of the Constitution just to see how far you can go.
Yesterday (June 6) was the 64th anniversary of D-Day. Operation Overlord sent 160,000 men into France to save the people of Europe from tyranny. 9000 men were killed or wounded ON D-Day. Some never made it out of their boats or onto the beach.
Those that did survive D-Day used June 6th as the start of the rest of their lives. I asked a hero what country he was wounded in, his reply was "D-Day plus 32". You see it did not matter to him where he was wounded, it mattered why he was wounded.
He bled on foreign ground to give those people freedom and to protect ours. His life blood was fused into that soil for the idea that no man anywhere should have to hear the words "papers please". The idea that no man should be subject to the whims of the power hungry or powerful.
To that hero and the millions just like him, I am sorry we have let you down. I am sorry we have failed and let your courage, sacrifice and honor fall to the wayside.
Please forgive us as we know not what we have done.
June 7, 2008 6:32 AM
When are you going to address our concerns regarding the hidden viewing of full body scan images?
June 7, 2008 9:37 AM
Seriously, do people at the TSA actually believe their own PR junk? It is blindingly obvious to outsiders how completely inept and incompetent the TSA is (what Mensa member came up with 3-1-1?); is it not also the case to insiders?
June 7, 2008 9:40 AM
"Pre-"9/11" security was an absolute joke and everybody knew it. Oh boy, contracted "security" firms -- glorified mall security guards -- watching over our nation's airports. Half those firms didn't care either..their eyes were on the bottom line and would hire just about anybody. Anything could be better than that. They were practically letting just about anybody walk on a plane with anything...and one day they did just that."
Yes, ONE day they did. That day was more the failure of the command chain of the intelligence community, than the then active airport security. It's not like TSA has plugged all the holes. People on both sides of the check point experience are unhappy. Judging from the more than 20% average turn over rate of TSA employees over the past few years, I'm going to guess things are not that rosy. I'm not sure the hiring practices or the training differs remarkably from the pre-9/11 situation. Picking the one out of a billion travelers that might be a terrorist just isn't easy. It take some highly skilled and motivated people to do it well. Annoying billions of travelers who present no threat is a problem, and one that is just beginning to be addressed.
June 7, 2008 4:15 PM
I just got a "This video is no longer available" message from Youtube for all 4 videos. Any chance you could repost them?
June 7, 2008 4:26 PM
"Oh boy, contracted "security" firms -- glorified mall security guards -- watching over our nation's airports. Half those firms didn't care either..their eyes were on the bottom line and would hire just about anybody."
This is in no way different from the situation with TSA: Incompetent or arrogant screeners are the norm, and little of the screening process enhances security while much of it hurts security.
June 7, 2008 5:01 PM
Anonymous Said:
"41 million fewer flights thanks to the hassles involved in flying these days. TSA: Doing its part to hurt the economy since its inception!"
I read the article and didn't see any reference to TSA at all. Not even airport security was mentioned...simply the hassles of traveling which are numerous besides being screened.
June 7, 2008 5:05 PM
I've tried to understand your side and ignore what people were saying about mission creep, but now it's official. Your new mandate that anyone who refuses to show ID will be refused entry in the sterile area has gone too far. In America, we have the right to travel domestically without ID. Some people don't feel comfortable showing ID, some has religious reasons, and some simply don't have ID. Give them a SSSS like you always did, but why interview them? Why waste their time? If someone forgot their ID, just put them in the SSSS lane, and be over with it.
I swear, this is feeling more and more like internal borders everyday. And, no, I don't have a tin foil hat on. It's just the way I see it. Why don't you post a blog entry with your reason and/or an explanation, or simply reverse the rule?
June 7, 2008 6:48 PM
What is secret at one of your checkpoints that I can view it but not record it?
June 7, 2008 10:25 PM
Re: TSA's so-very-pleased-with-itself press release on the upcoming requirement, as referenced by several people here already and found at http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/enhance_id_requirements.shtm, that passengers will be required to present approved ID to get on a plane.
So when do TSOs get training on the proper pronunciation of "Papiere bitte, kameraden!", anyways? Finally decided to stop pussyfooting around and really own up to the fact that you guys are a branch of the American version of the Komityet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti? (Actually, perhaps you should be practicing Russian, instead: "бумаги угождают, камрад!")
I can't even *BEGIN* to explain to you people how offended I am by your agency's gross destruction of some of the basic freedoms of this country, to say nothing of basic common courtesy. Rest assured, you will ***NEVER*** see my ID. ID has ***NOTHING*** to do with security, and [Jedi mind trick] you have no need to see my identification [/Jedi mind trick], for ANY cause whatsoever. LAW ENFORCEMENT doesn't get to see it except for a legitimate traffic stop or in the event of an actual criminal investigation, what makes you believe you have the right to see it when all I want to do is get on a frakking PLANE?
Treating those people who your own agency has referred to as "customers" as if they were actually convicted violent felons might have a little to do with the 41 million fewer flights per year the airline industry is suffering. Thanks TSA - thanks to YOU, the terrorists have indeed won.
I WEEP for my country.
June 8, 2008 2:16 AM
Trollkiller, a beautiful post - thank you very much.
However, the number of screeners fired for theft is, according to the TSA, 411. Given the TSA's habit of underestimating the number of complaints it receives, I'm will the bet the number could be double that.
To the anonymous person who said that he/she didn't see any mention of the TSA in the article about fewer number of fliers, you're right. The article did not mention the TSA by name, but it did refer to "travelers are most irritated with the air travel process" and "inefficient security screening." Who provides that inefficient security screening? Why the TSA, of course
Now to some other issues:
1. From USA Today re: the MMW at BWI:
"Passengers scanned in Baltimore said they did not know what the scanner did and were not told why they were directed into the booth.
(IOW, they were not offered the option of a patdown or the scan.)
Magazine-sized signs are posted around the checkpoint explaining the scanners, but passengers said they did not notice them....
("Magazine-sized signs" because the TSA does not want you to see them.)
Darin Scott of Miami was annoyed by the process.
"If you don't ask questions, they don't tell you anything," Scott said. When he asked a screener technical questions about the scanner, "he could not answer," Scott said."
2. ID required to get into the "sterile" area:
Since the TSA can't deny anyone the right to fly without ID, they have now come up with something "better": you can't access the "sterile" area of the airport without ID and the third degree by a SPOT-nik and a cop.
The TSA knows it can't enforce their "no ID, no fly" lie, so they throw up another roadblock: you can't get to the sterile area which in effect means that you can't fly.
The sad thing is that, as has been said so many, many times, anyone with evil intent is going to present him/herself with completely valid ID, just as happened on 9/11.
I don't think it will be very long before this new requirement is challenged in court as it is nothing more than an extremely blatant way to get around the "you can fly domestically without ID" Court ruling.
June 8, 2008 11:50 AM
RE: ID required after 6/21/2008
Question for the legal types.
Would subverting the constitution be an offense of treason?
I would like to find a legal group would would take this matter.
June 8, 2008 12:03 PM
Andy wrote:
Why don't you post a blog entry with your reason and/or an explanation, or simply reverse the rule?
Mhm.
TSA very seldom gives justification to the screeners on the line for their decisions. We haven't been told any justification for this personally, but I can offer some conjecture of my own:
/conjecture on
It's been mentioned elsewhere on this blog that the Aviation Transportation Security Act of 2001 gave the then-formed TSA statutory authority to require IDs to be shone prior to entry into the sterile area. At the time, they chose not to do so.
Here lately, there's been a kind of.. humm.. let's call it 'grassroots' movement of a kind of "civil disobedience" (as an activist friend of mine would call it) to not show IDs at security checkpoints. At the time, this was okay. We just made 'em a selectee and moved on.
Again this is all my own conjecture without any kind of proof to back it up, not even two-eyes observation. For all I know, that whole movement could just be six people that fly once every six months. But, on the assumption that it's a massive thing, let's continue:
Now, as this movement gets bigger and more and more people are having to be made selectees, it's starting to bog down the screening process. My own airport is relatively light compared to the big Class-X ports - my shift usually screens about a thousand or so passengers a day - but if "Bad Stuff" happens (flight delays and cancellations, rebooks, etc) that causes a large number of people to become selectees, it starts to cramp up the checkpoint.
Now, as I see it, with the TSA checkpoints being more and more bogged down by people refusing to show their ID, the TSA has taken steps to help solve the problem to promote passenger flow and efficiency.
In short, some people wanted to flex their muscles, and in so doing began to disrupt the steady flow of traffic through the checkpoints. The TSA flexed back using the statutory authority granted to it by the Congress in it's inception.
/conjecture off
Now, whether or not travel document checking provides any kind of real and effective security additions - that's a whole separate argument. Personally, I'm of the belief that it does not, but then I suppose it also depends upon your point of view.
In many ways, TSA has been shifting gears in the recent past, going from threat-items to threat-people. From what I've read on the public websites and such, and the creation of the BDO position, the goal is not to keep dangerous items off of airplanes, but to keep dangerous people with dangerous intent off of airplanes.
I can understand that point of view. However—
If the person has done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for, then they've done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for. They have no prohibited items with which to inflict harm, and being a malcontent isn't against the law. I'm of the opinion that you can't suspend someone's civil liberties because of what they might do.
Hindsight, as ever, will be 20/20 in this regard. Hypothetically speaking, I'm sure people all over would just adore us incidentally stopping and delivering into law enforcement hands, like, a serial rapist or mass-murderer or something - and then, in the next instantm, declaim about how much of a violation of civil rights it is.
It tends to swing one side to the other dependant upon who'se being asked for their IDs.
P.S.: I know the origin of the "Papers please" thing was the Gestapo, but can anybody show the historical accuracy of what those papers actually were? A brief search before I had to wrap this up and go to the screening floor came up with a whooooole bunch of stuff that had nothing at all to do with the actual historical Gestapo.
June 8, 2008 12:12 PM
You folks that say ID's have nothing to do with security aren't thinking very deeply. Who would be carrying false ID? Criminals? Terrorists? Illegal Aliens? No TSA isn't ICE and isn't the border patrol but those agencies also fall under the department of Homeland Security of which TSA is an arm. You must have a drivers license and obey the rules of the road to have the privelege of driving in this country. Yes driving is a priveledge just like flying is.
You can call it a dragnet but I'm pretty sure the TSA isn't trying to prevent law abiding citizens from flying. For God's sakes I have to show my ID to purchase alcohol and I have been of age for over 20 years. Why is this such a big deal?
June 8, 2008 4:44 PM
Vlado said...
What is secret at one of your checkpoints that I can view it but not record it?
Its ALL secret, kind of like the "secret" list of the no photos allowed public buildings. You can view them all you want, but can't photograph it.
If we can have "secret" laws and rules, then we can detain & arrest US citizens without any explaining. It is just easier than following that thing called the Constitution.
BTW: Trollkiller should run for president!
June 8, 2008 4:55 PM
I have to commend TSA for actually keeping this blog up to date and attempting to your technology to update the public with changes and progress reports.
Like everything about fling these days, its not perfect, but at least there is some effort going into it.
June 9, 2008 2:11 AM
Nice videos...Really Enjoyed..thanks!!!
June 9, 2008 8:49 AM
USA Today: By Thomas Frank 6/9/08
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-06-05-bodyscan_N.htm
"It's the wave of the future," said James Schear, the TSA security director at Baltimore-Washington International Airport, where two body scanners are in use at one checkpoint.
The TSA says it protects privacy by blurring passengers' faces and deleting images right after viewing. Yet the images are detailed, clearly showing a person's gender. "You can actually see the sweat on someone's back," Schear said.
Passengers scanned in Baltimore said they did not know what the scanner did and were not told why they were directed into the booth.”
Highly detailed imaging.
Withholding information from “selectees”.
Cavalier attitude from TSA security director.
Hmm. Blogger Bob’s you’re going to have to get creative again.
The people in charge of your agency are running out of control.
June 9, 2008 10:03 AM
It's quite interesting that comments positive to the TSA show up long before anti-TSA comments posted much earlier.
June 9, 2008 10:17 AM
Trollkiller said on June 7, 2008 6:32 AM
Those three stories were from the last couple of weeks. The next story gives tips to prevent the TSOs from stealing your stuff. It also tells about the 200 TSOs that have been fired for theft.
*********************************
Just a point of reference, did you see the Hartford Courant article over the weekend, Trollkiller, where TSA spokeswoman Ann Davis is quoted in the article as saying, '411 officers have been fired during the past five years for theft.' (Sorry I can't embed the link like you do-I'm techy challenged; there's a link to the article on FlyterTalk)
Then casey said June 7, 2008 12:58 AM...
Pre-"9/11" security was an absolute joke and everybody knew it. Oh boy, contracted "security" firms -- glorified mall security guards -- watching over our nation's airports. Half those firms didn't care either..their eyes were on the bottom line and would hire just about anybody. Anything could be better than that. They were practically letting just about anybody walk on a plane with anything...and one day they did just that.
**********************************
Casey-the only reason the 9/11 plot succeded the way it did was because 4 pilots, on 4 different planes, followed their companies policies, opened the doors to their cockpits & cooperated w/the hijackers. Since then the airlines have changed their policies to require that the doors remain locked, regardless of what is going on in the cabin, & the pilot LAND THE PLANE.
THAT, not the TSA nor any of it's security theatrics (lights, music, costumes, or loupes), will prevent another 9/11-style attack.
You're right that this agency isn't perfect, however, after all the years it has now been in existence, & all the billions upon billions of dollars they have squandered, the traveling public has the right, & responsibility, to demand better. Over the course of this blog's existence, there have been numerous well-thought out suggestions made; hopefully some of them might, one day, be implemented. However, as the current administration comes to a close & the tenure of those in the senior leadership roles w/in the TSA also ends, I am doubtful this will happen any time soon.
June 9, 2008 11:42 AM
So I might be a moron but what does 3-1-1 stand for anyway?
I've seen the signs, I've read about it on these boards, but the numbers still remain a mystery to me?
Oh and by the way... TSA already run you though a database when you buy your ticket. They check your ID to assure that you're the same person as the owner of the ticket.
June 9, 2008 12:09 PM
"Yes driving is a priveledge just like flying is. "
Is rail travel a privilege?
Is bus travel a privilege?
Is travel by ferry a privilege?
Is interstate travel a privilege?
Is intrastate travel a privilege?
Is the free movement of a citizen a right or a privilege?
It is called a slippery slope.
We are moving down it. Some are calling out for us to join in the slide down the slope and be 'safer'.
Others are saying the directions we are taking are wrong, un-American and in too many cases provide no real security.
Each freedom we lose is a another victory for terror.
,>)
T. Saint
June 9, 2008 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...
You folks that say ID's have nothing to do with security aren't thinking very deeply.
Oh, but we are.
Check this out: http://www.10news.com/investigations/14654657/detail.html
The few seconds that the TSA agent looks at an ID, I doubt that they would be able to detect a good fake ID. As long as picture matches person, and name matches ticket, they let you pass.
Can anyone site where a known terrorist has been apprehended and proven to be a terrorist from just the ID check? I will guess, not.
This article spells out what may happen:
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/tdc/index.shtm
You will note, not one was ever found to be a terrorist. I fail to understand how any of that increased security. If they are finding that many instances, then how many are they NOT finding, and I have yet to hear of any planes going down.
ID checks may find criminals, but I doubt they will ever find a terrorist.
June 9, 2008 3:01 PM
Bob Eucher said...
Its ALL secret, kind of like the "secret" list of the no photos allowed public buildings. You can view them all you want, but can't photograph it.
If we can have "secret" laws and rules, then we can detain & arrest US citizens without any explaining. It is just easier than following that thing called the Constitution.
BTW: Trollkiller should run for president!
Only rich people can become President. Sadly I am not rich, because I would rather be honest and true.
If I were to run this would be my platform.
1)Immigration: Secure borders. Immigration status would be checked during any negative law enforcement contact. i.e. get pulled over, immigration check, reporting a crime, no check. Businesses that knowingly hire illegals would be fined heavily and those responsible would be jailed.
2)Health care: Single tier pricing. If the visit, med or procedure is worth $40 when insurance is paying, then it is worth $40 when I am paying. All meds would be OTC except for the very few that require special handling, those would require a safety certificate.
Taxes: Flat tax, no reason Bill Gates should pay a higher or lower percentage than I do. All men are created equal, we should be taxed equally.
Energy: Reduce oil consumption to less than what we produce domestically by increasing solar, wind and nuclear energy production. Offer a no cost electrical conversion for older cars. (current cost about $10k per car)
Iraq: We are already there, stabilize the country and place bases there to protect the oil supply against hostile countries like Iran. Once we have reduced oil to domestic production only, pull out.
Domestic: End affirmatively action, either make it on your own or don't make it. End eminent domain cases where the reason for seizure is to increase the tax base. End law enforcement seizures except where a CONVICTION warrants it. End hidden "laws". If you can't show me the law saying I can't photograph a certain building then you are committing fraud and should be prosecuted.
I think I would rather head up the TSA than be President. It would be easier to get things done. Please keep my chair warm Kip.
If I were head of the TSA here is what I would do.
Cargo: All airline cargo would be secured by plastic straps to show the cargo has been screened and to discourage tampering.
Passengers: If they are not driving the thing you do not need to see ID. If the airlines want to check ID for their own business purposes that is fine.
Airports: All TSOs will be trained in first aid and CPR. Defibrillators would be available at all checkpoints.
Any invocation of a non existent law will result in immediate termination and fine of two weeks pay.
Any theft would result in immediate termination and fine of $15,000.
Pre-paid postage comment cards will be available at ALL "stops" in the screening area, No ID required. All comment cards with either a valid email, phone or mailing address will be responded to.
Of course I have more but I am running late for work. Please forgive the typos as I don't have time to proof read this.
June 9, 2008 3:19 PM
You folks that say ID's have nothing to do with security aren't thinking very deeply. Who would be carrying false ID? Criminals?
Why is it a big deal? Well for example:
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1415665
So now DC requires one to present an ID and reason if one is driving into a high crime rate area. How does ID for a passenger, (or lack there of, or faked ID) indicate their intentions?
Note: Pedestrians don't have to present ID.
Why is it a big deal? Remember the phrase, "Papers please." How does any ID verify any intentions one may have?
Why is it a big deal? There are parts of this country where you simply can not walk too. For example; Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, all the various territories etc.
Why is this a big deal? Typically one only has to identify themselves to law enforcement (and to the best of my knowledge is this only a verbal identification, but it varies by state see: Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada,), upon probable cause. Having lived abroad where law enforcement stops random people simply because they are bored is a very uncomfortable experience.
June 9, 2008 3:53 PM
Regarding the new ID policy that has been mentioned several times:
This new policy is clearly aimed specifically punishing those who would challenge the TSA bureaucracy, not improving security.
Really, given that you can board without ID if and only if you claim you forgot / lost your ID, but can not if you state you decline to present it, how can there be any claim that this improves security?
Actions like this are why the TSA has a reputation for security theater over security.
Please review and correct this matter.
June 9, 2008 4:34 PM
So you give us feel-good postings like this but refuse to comment on this:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-9962760-46.html
TSA: Where citizens are guilty until we say they aren't.
June 9, 2008 6:02 PM
I was about to post about how much I liked the new Checkpoint Evolution setup and how I thought for once the TSA was actually humanizing the experience at BWI. I flew through there last week, and really thought the setup and the staff were professional.
Then I hear this nonsense about the TSA doing everything it can to violate our civil liberties. This ID decision is nothing short of an attempt to silence those who try to assert their constitutional rights. I hope it's not too long until someone sues the TSA and gets these draconian restrictions banned. I love flying, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my civil liberties to do so.
June 9, 2008 10:49 PM
With terrorism spreading like a fire everywhere particulary the mayhem of the Heathrow Airport on 7th July back two years must compel the authorities to nstall liquid explosive detectors. Security must be tightened to ensure strict discipline on the airports.
June 10, 2008 4:53 AM
Bob Eucher said
Vlado said...
What is secret at one of your checkpoints that I can view it but not record it?
Its ALL secret, kind of like the "secret" list of the no photos allowed public buildings. You can view them all you want, but can't photograph it.
If we can have "secret" laws and rules, then we can detain & arrest US citizens without any explaining. It is just easier than following that thing called the Constitution.
That explains the hundreds of people arrested everyday at airport security checkpoints because they were taking pictures or videos of their loved ones going through security. I WORK at an airport. The only thing we tell people is, don't take pictures of the monitors. As for no-picture buildings, never heard of any. How many people do YOU know who have been "secretly" arrested or "disappeared" for violating a "secret" law?
soon to be
7-year tso
June 10, 2008 5:44 AM
Why are you still slowing the whole process down with the pointless requirement that I keep my boarding pass in hand at all times? You just checked it. It will be a lot easier to jump through all the other hoops like taking my shoes off and getting my laptop out if I don't have to worry about this flimsy piece of paper the whole time. Re-check it again when I exit the whole ordeal if you really insist on doing it twice, but give me back the use of both hands.
You guys claim to be looking for ideas for streamlining, but for some reason this simple thing is overlooked.
June 10, 2008 6:15 AM
"You folks that say ID's have nothing to do with security aren't thinking very deeply. Who would be carrying false ID? Criminals? Terrorists? Illegal Aliens?"
You do know that every one of the 9/11 hijackers had a valid picture ID, yes?
June 10, 2008 7:56 AM
I'll post this here as there seems to be no other place to put it -
I see that the TSA will now insist that domestic flyers must show ID, or they will be denied boarding.
Care to comment on this latest little end-run around the "rights and freedoms" of citizens?
June 10, 2008 8:40 AM
Wow... you go away for a couple of weeks and look what hits the fan... mandatory ID checks or you don't get through.
I have read through most of the comments on here, and what I have not seen is much mention of the advancement of Real ID. It's still early in the a.m. and I have not had enough coffee yet, but wasn't that program supposed to make its next pernicious steps forward in June of this year, and wasn't TSA supposed to be part of that effort?
June 10, 2008 10:34 AM
Making 2 million passengers per day arrive an extra hour early to do the TSA-hokey pokey has a significant cost. Anonymous's 41 million flights due to travel hassles is a reasonable cost to blame on the TSA.
If those 41 million flights worth of passengers are still travelling, they are likely using something more dangerous than flying, and are more likely to die because of it.
Flying is safer than driving, and when the inconveniences and fears cause people to drive rather than fly, more people die:
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/March05/Sept11driving.pdf. Also TSA screening costs lives.
TSA is probably responsible for killing more people by wasting time than they could hope to save through screening.
June 10, 2008 11:36 AM
Good commentary on the new ID policy:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-9962760-46.html
June 10, 2008 11:47 AM
HELLO, IS THIS ON?
June 10, 2008 12:32 PM
You guys throwing in the towel?
No new posts since the morning of 6/9.
June 10, 2008 1:06 PM
PLEASE put up an excuse to persecute citizens who want to fly within the United States without showing ID to federal employees. I'm anxious to hear the reasoning behind the new policy. Perhaps Chertoff or Hawley could author the article so you bloggers aren't put on the spot.
June 10, 2008 2:06 PM
Is everybody ok? It has been over 24 hours since the last post was approved so I wanted to make sure there was not some disaster preventing post approval.
I would hate to think you guys are sandbagging posts in hopes of breaking the dissenters' momentum.
If that is the plan it is destined to fail, all you will do is run off the people that support you.
Folks like me will be here every day holding your feet to the fire until the TSA takes its proper place as either a righteous agency or a footnote in history.
June 10, 2008 2:27 PM
"This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity."
And who is to decide who isn't being "cooperative?" A rookie TSO having a bad day? Come on, TSA. You've got to be kidding me. We have freedom of movement in this country. I've paid my taxes to pay for the TSA and the FAA. My local tax dollars keep the airport open. I've purchased a seat on the airplane. Give me my SSSS and move on.
June 10, 2008 3:36 PM
I think I'll check my ID with my luggage, so you won't have to.
June 10, 2008 4:47 PM
winstonsmith said on June 10, 2008 10:34 AM
I have read through most of the comments on here, and what I have not seen is much mention of the advancement of Real ID. It's still early in the a.m. and I have not had enough coffee yet, but wasn't that program supposed to make its next pernicious steps forward in June of this year, and wasn't TSA supposed to be part of that effort?
*********************************
Did you miss this announcement WinstonSmith?
http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/gc_1200062053842.shtm
Be sure to scroll down & click on the link showing the list & map of states granted an extension (regardless of whether they wanted or asked for it!) I got a good chuckle out of it!
Welcome back-missed your posts & look forward to new ones once you have partaken of sufficient caffeine!
June 10, 2008 5:04 PM
You can all thank, with weepy eyes, activist John Gilmore who took the U.S. government to court in 2004 over showing ID to fly. Gilmore refused to show ID to TSA and also refused to undergo the more thorough "secondary screening" search. He eventually lost his case before the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals which recognized that persons have the right to travel, but not necessarily by airplane. So through Gilmore's activist actions intent on undoing ID requirements to fly, he did the exact opposite and compelled one of the most liberal activist courts in this country to reject his claim and create the case law that this requirement will be based upon. Don't forget this little tidbit of authority taken directly from tsa.gov:
Under the law that created TSA, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, the TSA administrator is responsible for overseeing aviation security (P.L. 107-71) and has the authority to establish security procedures at airports (49 C.F.R. § 1540.107). Passengers that fail to comply with security procedures may be prohibited from entering the secure area of airports to catch their flight (49 C.F.R. § 1540.105(a)(2).
June 10, 2008 6:07 PM
HSVTSO Dean wrote:
"It's been mentioned elsewhere on this blog that the Aviation Transportation Security Act of 2001 gave the then-formed TSA statutory authority to require IDs to be shone prior to entry into the sterile area."
I've heard that as well, but I've yet to see a citation of that which grants this authority. If you have, please provide it.
"Here lately, there's been a kind of.. humm.. let's call it 'grassroots' movement of a kind of "civil disobedience" (as an activist friend of mine would call it) to not show IDs at security checkpoints."
That is not civil disobedience. There is no requirement that people identify themselves to to government agents before traveling domestically. Our not doing so is not disobedience of any sort.
Similarly, if government agents were conducting door-to-door searches of every home at which someone consented to the search, those who chose not to consent to a search would not be committing an act of civil disobedience, they would simply be asserting their right to protection from unlawful search.
This would be the case even if the people who consented to the search were misled into believing that they were required to consent, in a manner similar to that by which TSA misleads travelers into believing that they are required to identify themselves. It's still not disobedience. It is wisely exercising one's rights.
If we don't exercise our rights, it is very likely that we will lose them. Standing up for your rights is the patriotic thing to do.
Those of us who refuse to ask permission from the United States government before traveling within the country (showing ID then waiting for permission to proceed is requesting permission to travel) are protecting the rights of those who foolishly or carelessly waive their rights.
Restriction of travel is a tactic commonly used by oppressive governments. I encourage everyone who reads this to me in pushing back at our increasingly-oppressive government while we still can.
June 10, 2008 6:41 PM
HSVTSO Dean wrote:
"If the person [attempting to pass a U.S. government checkpoint at a public airport] has done nothing wrong within the scope of what we [the TSA] screen for, then they've done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for."
I can't argue with that.
Unfortunately, "what you screen for" is clearly not just things that affect transportation security.
Most of the instances of passengers being caught with falsified I.D. cards and passports that are described on TSA's "Travel Document Checker (TDC)" Web page (under "Travel Document Checking Success Stories") were arrested on charges of immigrations violations, possession of illegal drugs, or credit card theft. None of them is described as having been found to be carrying anything that, had he brought it onto his flight, would have put other passengers or crew at risk.
"being a malcontent isn't against the law."
True. However, beginning June 21, being uncooperative with government agents who are attempting to interfere with your freedom to travel and associate will result in those agents barring you from traveling.
"I'm of the opinion that you can't suspend someone's civil liberties because of what they might do."
I believe your organization can and does do so on a regular basis.
June 10, 2008 6:55 PM
"Really, given that you can board without ID if and only if you claim you forgot / lost your ID, but can not if you state you decline to present it, how can there be any claim that this improves security?"
Ah, but you see, no terrorist would ever be so devious as to LIE about why he or she did not have ID!
June 10, 2008 8:26 PM
Ah, the joys of (-1^.5)real id program. My family moved from one state to another and we attempted to get our drivers license' changed. As a guy I needed both my original birth certificate and the old license (not a big deal). The wife, on the other hand, needed all of that stuff plus, her marriage license (name change stuff), a certified copy of her divorce decree (from her first marriage, now more than 20 years in the past), and certified copies of every name change she'd ever had including her first marriage.
I feel sorry for any woman to now attempt to get a new driver's license when moving into any state complying with the (-1^.5)real id program.
Our government runs amok if we do nothing to make it accountable to the citizens.
June 10, 2008 9:31 PM
Neal said...
Why are you still slowing the whole process down with the pointless requirement that I keep my boarding pass in hand at all times? You just checked it. It will be a lot easier to jump through all the other hoops like taking my shoes off and getting my laptop out if I don't have to worry about this flimsy piece of paper the whole time. Re-check it again when I exit the whole ordeal if you really insist on doing it twice, but give me back the use of both hands.
at my airport, and im sure most are the same. we have a 'buffer' area betwwn tdc and the walk through. i've seen several people try to get around the tdc without getting checked. when the lines are full of people, loud noise, people moving everywhere, it can be easy for someone to slip around.
we also have to include the element of human error. 2 eyes are better then 1.
June 10, 2008 9:45 PM
"As for no-picture buildings, never heard of any."
http://tinyurl.com/yrzacm
,>)
June 10, 2008 11:59 PM
HSVTSO Dean said, "I'm of the opinion that you can't suspend someone's civil liberties because of what they might do."
In 1988, Ronald Reagan signed legislation which apologized for the forced relocation and detention of over one hundred thousand Japanese and Japanese Americans on behalf of the U.S. government.
The legislation stated that government actions were based on...
"race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership"
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
,>)
June 11, 2008 12:17 AM
Straight to the issues:
http://www.papersplease.org/gilmore/facts.html
Anecdotal and personal:
Papiere Bitte by Doris Colmes
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/colmes1.html
Gute Nacht allerseits.
June 11, 2008 12:45 AM
For those really wishing to understand the need for DHS and TSA (read current administration) to keep us constantly in fear of terrorism, and to make useless rules for us to adhere to, please read this:
Terrorphobia
June 11, 2008 2:39 AM
winstonsmith said...
Wow... you go away for a couple of weeks and look what hits the fan... mandatory ID checks or you don't get through.
No more vacations for you. BTW I took the time to watch 1984 the other night, I had forgotten almost everything.
If I did not like Trollkiller so much I would change my name to Agent of Goldstein.
June 11, 2008 12:29 PM
HSVTSO Dean said...
P.S.: I know the origin of the "Papers please" thing was the Gestapo, but can anybody show the historical accuracy of what those papers actually were? A brief search before I had to wrap this up and go to the screening floor came up with a whooooole bunch of stuff that had nothing at all to do with the actual historical Gestapo.
Sorry it took so long to get back to you, I was going to post this last night but I was so tire I was not coherent.
Very nice list on what freedoms were removed and when.
Picture of a Jewish ID card.
Jewish Passport.
As you can see by the list the papers would allow or prevent a person from entering certain shops or areas of a city. In other words a "good" citizen was allowed in the sterile area, an undesirable citizen was denied.
Look familiar? We in America like to fool ourselves and think it can never happen here. Things of this nature were defeated at Berlin. Sadly they were not. Ask the Soviets, Cubans, East Germans, South Africans, or any other place where the citizen's travel is/was restricted.
June 11, 2008 12:57 PM
Oyez Oyez
Hear Ye Hear Ye
The TSA has announced a change of policy. It is no longer possible to fly without ID.
In the past, respecting the right to travel in a free country, one could opt to receive an invasive pat-down instead of showing ID to someone who had no right to ask for it. Now there is now options, you must show your ID to someone who has no right to ask for it.
Does this tie into REAL-ID and the non-compliant States? How come there have been no blog entries about this current event?
Details maybe will be available later, if the blog team feels up to the challenge.
June 11, 2008 1:53 PM
From the Black Diamond Self-Select Lanes page:
Did you know?
42% of the checkpoint bottlenecks are caused by delays in composing after screening.
Is this solved with the newer lanes, i.e., is there actually room for people to compose themselves? If not, this is just TSA complaining without offering a solution.
June 11, 2008 2:25 PM
Anonymous said...
You can all thank, with weepy eyes, activist John Gilmore who took the U.S. government to court in 2004 over showing ID to fly. Gilmore refused to show ID to TSA and also refused to undergo the more thorough "secondary screening" search. He eventually lost his case before the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals which recognized that persons have the right to travel, but not necessarily by airplane. So through Gilmore's activist actions intent on undoing ID requirements to fly, he did the exact opposite and compelled one of the most liberal activist courts in this country to reject his claim and create the case law that this requirement will be based upon. Don't forget this little tidbit of authority taken directly from tsa.gov:
Under the law that created TSA, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, the TSA administrator is responsible for overseeing aviation security (P.L. 107-71) and has the authority to establish security procedures at airports (49 C.F.R. § 1540.107). Passengers that fail to comply with security procedures may be prohibited from entering the secure area of airports to catch their flight (49 C.F.R. § 1540.105(a)(2).
If a lawyer at the TSA signed off on this based on the Gilmore vs. Ashcroft (now Gonzales) case, they need to find another profession.
For those that want to play along at home, here is the 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals ruling. (PDF Warning)
The MOST important aspect of the Gilmore case is Gilmore refused to show his ID to the AIRLINE employees.
The Gilmore case hinges on the fact that he could fly without ID if he allowed himself to be subject to a secondary screening. (Reasonable) Gilmore chose not to allow it.
The case also hinges on the fact he could leave instead of being searched. (Reasonable)
The 9th Circus also ruled that his travel was not restricted because he did not prove to them that the same ID requirement was in place for buses or trains. (Lazy)
With this new policy in effect it requires you show your ID to a Government agent and removes the choice of a secondary screening. If the passenger decides to uphold his right not to present papers the TSA can invoke penalties.
I have been working on this post for two days, I was trying to be fair, and just present the facts. I can't, this idiotic new rule has my blood boiling. Reading the court decision that will bolster this new ID requirement and the asinine reasoning the 9th Circuit used to back their ruling is about to make my head explode.
Take this part where they say denying a person the ability to fly is equal to denying a person the ability to drive. Bolding mine.
III. Right To Travel
[11] Gilmore alleges that the identification policy violates
his constitutional right to travel because he cannot travel by
commercial airlines without presenting identification, which
is an impermissible federal condition.10
We reject Gilmore’s
right to travel argument because the Constitution does not
guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
Because Gilmore lacks standing to challenge anything but the identification policy’s impact on air travel, his sole argument
is that “air travel is a necessity and not replaceable by
other forms of transportation.”
Although we do not question this allegation for purposes of this petition, it does not follow
that Defendants violated his right to travel, given that other
forms of travel remain possible.
This circuit’s decision in Miller v. Reed, 176 F.3d 1202
(9th Cir. 1999), is on point. In Miller, the plaintiff challenged
California’s requirement that applicants submit their social
security numbers to the DMV in order to obtain valid drivers
licenses.
The plaintiff alleged that this policy violated his fundamental
right to interstate travel and his right to freely exercise
his religion. In affirming the district court’s dismissal
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), we concluded that
“by denying Miller a single mode of transportation—in a car driven by himself—the DMV did not unconstitutionally impede Miller’s
right to interstate travel.” Id. at 1204.
Although we recognized
the fundamental right to interstate travel, we also acknowledged
that “burdens on a single mode of transportation do not
implicate the right to interstate travel.” Id. at 1205 (citing
Monarch Travel Servs., Inc. v. Associated Cultural Clubs,
Inc., 466 F.2d 552, 554 (9th Cir. 1972)).
[12]
Like the plaintiff in Miller, Gilmore does not possess a fundamental right to travel by airplane even though it is the most convenient mode of travel for him.
Moreover, the identification
policy’s “burden” is not unreasonable. See Shapiro v.
Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629 (1969) (noting the right of all
citizens to be “free to travel throughout the length and breadth
of our land uninhibited by statutes, rules, or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement”), overruled in part on other grounds by Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651,
670-71 (1974).
The identification policy requires that airline passengers either present identification OR be subjected to a more extensive search.
The more extensive search is similar to searches that we have determined were reasonable and
“consistent with a full recognition of appellant’s constitutional
right to travel.”
SOMEONE, anyone please explain to me how denying someone the ability to OPERATE a car equals the ability to deny someone access to a vehicle they are NOT operating? If I am not driving the thing I DON'T need a license.
Thought processes like this is one of the reasons the 9th Circuit gets overturned on a regular basis.
By this fouled up reasoning the authorities could in all Constitutional righteousness deny you EVERY form of travel except walking. After all denying you a mode of transportation does not equal denial freedom of travel.
To sum up if the TSA is going to use Gilmore as its case law to back this new ID requirement it will need to understand that
1) Gilmore refused to show ID to an AIRLINE employee, not the TSA,
2) Gilmore had the OPTION of a secondary screening.
3) Gilmore was not sanctioned for refusing to show the ID,
4) Gilmore was free to leave
The TSA's new ID requirement does not pass the test that allows us to free to travel throughout the length and breadth of our land uninhibited by statutes, rules, or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement.
It is an unreasonable burden
June 11, 2008 3:02 PM
HSVTSO Dean used the term "US government checkpoint." Does that frighten anyone besides me? Where else will we have these "US government checkpoints" in the future? Actually the "US government checkpoint"at American Airlines in SFO is still run by rent-a-cops, some of whom speak English.BTW, When will TSA answer the questions regarding small knives vs knitting needles and 4" pointed scissors?
June 11, 2008 3:25 PM
Since you only respond, if at all, to remarks on active, first page blog subjects, which you choose, I am going to ask a 3-1-1 question which has no chance of being seen on the older, more appropriate blog. I read that TSA policy,in concert with EU policy,is to limit containers to 100 ml or about 3.4oz. Yet at SFO there is a sign saying 3oz max and in () 90ml. Which is it and if I try to take 3.4oz, will it be confiscated? Who's in charge, TSA or the rentacops at SFO?
June 11, 2008 3:47 PM
You ought to make another rule that terrorists should have the word "TERRORIST" tattooed across their foreheads. That would provide for many streamlining opportunities in your new checkpoint process.
June 11, 2008 4:25 PM
"This initiative is simply a way for us to better enforce the no-fly list"
Sigh. Please, lets keep it real.
Play this out:
Someone is on the no fly list. Their buddy is not. Buddy buys a ticket. They modify the ticket to bear the name of the someone on the no fly list.
They show up at the airport and present the doctored ticket and an ID that matches.
The people examining him and the documents have _no_ idea if that name is on the no fly list. They pass him into the 'secure' area.
This hole is well known and has been widely discussed.
"This initiative is simply a way for us to better enforce the no-fly list"
Unless you have plans to begin checking our names against the lists at your checkpoints your statement is at best disingenuous.
June 11, 2008 7:27 PM
Looks like Glad, the makers of Ziploc, scored a fat deal with the TSA. (See 1:02 into the first video)
June 12, 2008 11:49 AM
An Anonymous person wrote:
HSVTSO Dean used the term "US government checkpoint." Does that frighten anyone besides me?
Only if your imagination regularly frightens you. To wit:
I wrote
If the person has done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for, then they've done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for.
You will note that nowhere did I write "a US government checkpoint." Your confusion came from--
Phil, who wrote:
HSVTSO Dean wrote:
"If the person [attempting to pass a U.S. government checkpoint at a public airport] has done nothing wrong within the scope of what we [the TSA] screen for, then they've done nothing wrong within the scope of what we screen for."
Apparently, Phil didn't think that the obviousness of what I was writing was good enough, so decided to settle in the bracketed text to make it clear for those people educated in government schools.
It's okay, Mr. Anonymous. It's just a molehill.
By the way, Trollkiller:
I would hate to think you guys are sandbagging posts in hopes of breaking the dissenters' momentum.
I've been noticing that, on the weekends, post-approval goes to almost zero. Typically any post I write on, say, a Wednesday is up in a couple of hours. If I write one on a Friday afternoon, it's not going to be up until Monday morning.
p.s.: Thanks for the links.
June 12, 2008 12:07 PM
US government check point? Hmmm, going into a military reservation? Yep. Border checkpoint? Yep? Boarding a plane? No, even if TSA wants it to be that way.
Funding increases due to mission creep (think of metastatic cancer with the same results)does little to make the traveling public any safer. TSA takes on more responsibilities even though TSA consistantly shows it barely handles the current list of responsibilities (thefts, abuse of traveling public, failed Red Tests, made up on the spot rules, lack of accountability, etc).
Stop looking to Hollywood for senarios for imaginary terrorist threats. Admit you were wrong on several major issues and roll back the 3-1-1 rulings and shoes. Comply with the Constitution. Have Congress make an oversight committee to rein in an out of control angency - DHS. Hold managment accountable for abuses by TSA employees. Use some common sense.
June 14, 2008 9:43 AM
Overall, I think that the TSA is taking a step in the right direction. Of course (as with any new program) there will be mistakes made, but in the end this new system could just do the trick. I am however, interested to see which parts of the evolution will prevail, and which will become extinct within a matter of months.
-Ken
June 27, 2008 2:39 AM
Annonymous said: "Now if they can just get the screeners in Orlando to speak intelligible English...."
Annonymous said:Add Miami airport to that request. I´d be happy if they spoke any English, even unintelligible.
I hope so..because that make me crazy when they can't speak English
July 12, 2008 3:34 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home