TSA to open PreCheck to all for a fee

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by jackonferry, Jul 19, 2013.

  1. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Yeah BBT.
     
  2. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Today's NY Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/opinion/sunday/airport-security-without-the-hassle.html?_r=0

    You might want to move this to the Pre-Check thread, RB.
     
  3. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    I was reading that thread earlier. I don't think he/she gets it at its most fundamental level.
     
  4. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    I"m not exactly sure how this would work. What if you're using Tor (or another anonymizer) and duckduckgo or startpage? In those cases they might get some of your search history, but certainly not all of it. And why would I tell TSA that I'm using tools to mask my online presence? And would they believe me if I said that I wasn't on facebook?

    I'd love to see the form you have to fill out... The only thing I could find doing a quick search was this:

    -Fill out an online application.
    -Verify identity and provide fingerprints at a TSA Pre✓™ enrollment center.

    Not that I would ever apply for precheck, but I am curious how open-ended the background check is. And I guess the fingerprints are to see what else comes up?

    The closest experience I have for reference is that before you can practice law, not only do you have to pass the bar, you also have to pass a 'moral character' test too (I know, I know). For me, this was all in the last half of the 1990s, so maybe things have changed... Part of the test was to fill out a twenty page questionnaire that covers all jobs you've ever had (salaries too), every place you've ever lived (since age 18), whether you've done drugs, drink too much, have been arrested (speeding and parking tickets count), have ever seen a psychiatrist, etc.. I also had to list 6 or 7 people that could be called and would be able to answer questions about my moral character. It was sort of daunting - and intrusive. And we had to be fingerprinted as well. I was a privacy advocate even back then, so you can imagine how I felt about this process. I did it anyway, but I wasn't happy about it.

    I understand the reasoning behind it, lawyers are in a position of trust, and the state wants to do what it reasonably can to weed out problematic people. I get it.

    What about the TSA and precheck though? The whole thing doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Passengers aren't in a position of trust, so what are they being tested for anyway? The vast, vast majority of people aren't terrorists, so they end up looking for something that isn't there. All I can figure out is that the whole thing is a face-saving measure, and a revenue raiser for the TSA. No added security, and the only benefit to the passenger is that they might not get groped. Doesn't seem like a good deal to me.
     
  5. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I kept wondering if I was being unreasonable with that poster. I think the position I put forth was well founded.
     
  6. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    No, RB, you were not being unreasonable with that poster. I have been following (lurking) around that thread, too. Bicoastal is one of those people who couldn't get a clue even if they were doused in clue musk and dropped in the middle of a clue reserve during clue mating season.*

    *Borrowed from something that I read here, or at the other place.
     
    jtodd likes this.
  7. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    Hilarious, DeafBlonde. I don't think you're being unreasonable either RB.

    It's like Bicoastal is being willfully clueless. I didn't read the whole thread, just the last couple of pages, and I was shaking my head the whole time.
     
    jtodd likes this.
  8. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    I have been lurking there as well on that thread, and I think Bicoastal is simply of a different mindset. They sound like a lot of the science and research geeks I know - to them, everything boils down to math, everything else is inconsequential. I have a friend that is a C & C operator/programmer, and he is essentially the same, everything is numbers. Of course, his inability to relate to the human element inherent in most things is causing him trouble with his kid, but that is beside the point. I can understand what Bicoastal is saying, and from their point of view, they may be saying exactly what they think without regard to the other aspects of the situation. Folks that separate from emotion in their approach to things are difficult to relate to, difficult to understand and easy to dislike or misunderstand in their positions. Of course, I could be completely wrong on my observations, even though there is an underlying logic to what BC has been posting.
     
  9. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    @Sunny Goth:

    I think you hit the nail on the head.

    (Although at the other place, one alleged screener insisted that the TSA had found an IED in May of 2009 but he wouldn't back his assertion up with facts or links. When challenged to do so, he just ran and hid in typical TSA fashion.)
     
    jtodd likes this.
  10. Doober

    Doober Original Member


    A mad scientist lost in his own little world. I have a cousin like this. However, I don't think they intentionally separate from emotion; it's more likely that they weren't born with the ability to be empathetic. In this day and age, they would be diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum.
     
  11. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Very much like that. I also have a cousin that builds custom motorcycles and chop cars, he is an artist through and through, creative in so many ways that it is scary - he doesn't understand how everyday people can't come up with solutions to their problems by creating one, or sitting down with a handful of tools and figuring out how to fix what is broken (by trial and error, and an innate sense of how things tick - literally, he repaired an old grandfather clock at 10 because he liked the ticking sound it made). Some people that are forged into a certain mindset can't understand how everyone else doesn't think like they do, and as a result, a disconnect often occurs - even when both sides have valid points or a newer/different way of looking at things.
     
  12. JoeBas

    JoeBas Original Member

    I tried hitting him from a Bayesian mathematical/statistical angle. Let's see if he gets it.
     
  13. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I'm looking for a banning note after my last post on the matter over there.

    I said this!:D


    "I do wonder if you work or contract for TSA and if so I think I understand part of TSA's troubles."
     
  14. JoeBas

    JoeBas Original Member

    Or not.

    I'm going to have to go with "Deliberately Obtuse". ;)
     
  15. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    I wonder when NYPD will offer a similar Stop 'n Grope extortion program for visitors to NYC?
     
  16. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    His continued use of the word "we" tells me that yes, he does work for DHS/TSA, which explains the obstinacy and the obtuseness.
     
  17. RB

    RB Founding Member


    I agree with your read of the guy but I think "(expletive deleted)" would have described him just as well.
     
  18. Frank

    Frank Original Member

    I believe I am to blame for it here, but it was not my original idea.

    The original: He couldn't catch a clue if you doused him in clue musk and dropped him in a field of horny clues during clue mating season.
     
  19. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    I was paraphrasing, evidently. :D
     
    Fisher1949 likes this.
  20. N965VJ

    N965VJ Original Member

    AirfareWatchdog.com is now pimping for the TSA. From one of their email alerts:

    A hundred times on the blackboard:

    Screening delays are not caused by the traveling public that are unfamiliar with the procedures; they are caused by intrusive screening theatre like body scanners.

    And I had to Google what ren faire boots are. :eek::p



    I think I've mentioned this before, but I had to be fingerprinted for an Airport Operations Area credential in 2002. I'm guessing the only thing they looked at was if the FBI's NCIC database had anything on me, but anyone that has access to the NCIC doesn't need fingerprints to do a check.

    After about ten years of crews being subjected to random drug and alcohol tests this seemed like just more stupid theatre, like being pulled off the jetway after the last leg on the last day of a trip to blow into a tube (this is the only time random tests are done). But in hindsight I should given more thought about my fingerprints being stored in a database somewhere.


    I think you mean CNC - computer numerical control. I'm not an engineer, but I know enough about SolidWorks to screw other people's work up. :D
     
Tags: tsa, pre-check

Share This Page