Are random ID checks while boarding the plane a new thing?

[NotUrsula]

How so?

By the existence of the FAA, and the fact that "security" fees are charged to the passenger rather than to the airline.

When the FAA was created during the Eisenhower administration, it was established with a dual mandate, to oversee safety and encourage the development of the passenger air industry. The irony, of course, is that the dual mandate worked at cross-purposes: it is impossible to require the safest operating practices and still "encourage" the industry to grow larger, because the cost of safety equipment and procedures cut deeply into the industry's bottom line, and discourages expansion of service. Heck, that is even why a 2 yo can still fly as a lap child, because the FAA's tests show that the most likely outcome of requiring ticket purchase for babies is that the entire family will drive instead of fly, where the likelihood of that baby being involved in an accident statistically climbs -- and where, not coincidentally, the airline loses the revenue of at least two sold seats.

Here's a nice little timeline that helps to show a bit of the relationship between airlines and the Federal government over the years.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/flyingcheap/etc/cronfaa.html

 

[CPT Tripss]

The issue of freedom of movement has received new attention in the United States as of 2004, particularly concerning the methods and practices of the Transportation Security Administration. On August 5, 1974, the Air Transportation Security and Anti-Hijacking Acts of 1974 (P.L. 93-366) were signed. Among many important provisions, this landmark aviation security law directed that regulations be prescribed requiring weapons-detecting screening of all passengers and carry-on property. The law is located in Title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), sections 44901 (Screening passengers and property) and 44902 (Refusal to transport passengers and property). For many decades an airline ticket's fine print has contained an agreement by the purchaser to submit to a search for unlawful dangerous weapons, explosives or other destructive substances. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is responsible for such screening prior to departures from commercial airports within the United States since the signing of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (P.L. 107-71) on November 19, 2001. Freedom of movement is not denied unless a passenger refuses to submit to a search required by law. There are, however, a number of other safety and homeland-security-related issues covered in 49 U.S.C. Chapter 449 and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations in the 1540 series that could impede movement, such as a passenger's name appearing on a "no fly" or "selectee" list.

A right is seldom, if ever unrestricted. Think about the limited restrictions on speech, assembly, bearing arms, and more. A search for weapons and a check against the no fly list then you can exercise you right to fly. The airline does the no fly list check.

The Airport Security Screeners do not consult the no fly list when the perform their ID check. At best, they compare the name on the ID and boarding pass and the picture on the ID with your face. How does that add to airport security?

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

Are you safer now then pre 9/11? Sure. Is it do the Thousands Standing Around? LOL Well, if you think thugs acting important provides security.

IMHO our increased security is due to the efforts of REAL law enforcement and other changes (secured doors to the flight deck etc...)

 

[gmeh1]

A right is seldom, if ever unrestricted. Think about the limited restrictions on speech, assembly, bearing arms, and more. A search for weapons and a check against the no fly list then you can exercise you right to fly. The airline does the no fly list check.

The Airport Security Screeners do not consult the no fly list when the perform their ID check. At best, they compare the name on the ID and boarding pass and the picture on the ID with your face. How does that add to airport security?

By your thoughts, none. But, it does match the name to the boarding pass. It keeps people from boarding with a pass that they may have stolen or obtained through some other method.

 

[gmeh1]

Are you safer now then pre 9/11? Sure. Is it do the Thousands Standing Around? LOL Well, if you think thugs acting important provides security.

IMHO our increased security is due to the efforts of REAL law enforcement and other changes (secured doors to the flight deck etc...)

"Thugs" really? Those thugs put up with a lot of crap on a day to day basis, they do a pretty good job screening carry-ons. They do not just stand around any more than "real law enforcement" eat doughnuts all day. I realize you are a big time flier and car renter, but, those facts don't make you an expert on the TSA or Car Rental agencies. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion and I respect that, but, I totally disagree.

 

[gmeh1]

By the existence of the FAA, and the fact that "security" fees are charged to the passenger rather than to the airline.

When the FAA was created during the Eisenhower administration, it was established with a dual mandate, to oversee safety and encourage the development of the passenger air industry. The irony, of course, is that the dual mandate worked at cross-purposes: it is impossible to require the safest operating practices and still "encourage" the industry to grow larger, because the cost of safety equipment and procedures cut deeply into the industry's bottom line, and discourages expansion of service. Heck, that is even why a 2 yo can still fly as a lap child, because the FAA's tests show that the most likely outcome of requiring ticket purchase for babies is that the entire family will drive instead of fly, where the likelihood of that baby being involved in an accident statistically climbs -- and where, not coincidentally, the airline loses the revenue of at least two sold seats.

Here's a nice little timeline that helps to show a bit of the relationship between airlines and the Federal government over the years.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/flyingcheap/etc/cronfaa.html

Thank you!!!

 

[gmeh1]

Feel just as safe as I did prior to reading that. I've known what happens 'behind the scenes' for a long time. Have you seen what goes on in restaurant kitchens? In hospitals? Every single place has it's own issues, and it's fair share of rule-benders/breakers.
So yeah, I'm not so upset about having my bag rechecked at the gate. That article just proved why it happens!!


Well, I'm a 60+ woman as well. What would make anyone think I'm not capable of doing something nasty?? This is the issue with this country. We tend to think that terrorists have curly dark hair, very dark eyes and darkish skin...they 'look' foreign. So, white, redhaired 63 y/o women aren't going to be looked at...and that's kind of wrong. The same way that children need to be looked at..it is not only men that are capable of doing these awful things.

IF someone has been brought into the terminal area, wrongfully, then yes, I want every bag at every gate to be double checked. I want ID's checked. Most times it is going to be no big deal. But that one time it is a big deal, I want them stopped before they get on a plane!!! Those 'loopholes' need to be closed up. In the meantime, check all you want!!

Me too on the 60+ woman thing. And, I totally agree with the rest of your post.

 

[gmeh1]

Not everybody checks luggage. Passengers with just a carry-on and a personal item who print their boarding pass at home (or use an electronic boarding pass) have thus checked in online and don't need to present themselves at the airline counter.

Good point.

 

[goofy4tink]

Are you safer now then pre 9/11? Sure. Is it do the Thousands Standing Around? LOL Well, if you think thugs acting important provides security.

IMHO our increased security is due to the efforts of REAL law enforcement and other changes (secured doors to the flight deck etc...)

I have no problem with debate..even heated debate. But, I DO have an issue with name-calling. You are making a gross generalization...and I've said it before, it isn't welcome on this board. I'm sure there are some less than wonderful TSA people. But, I'm also pretty sure there are some less than wonderful policemen, firemen, bus drivers and schoolteachers.
I have seen some law enforcement people that actually did fit the definition of 'thug' pretty well....they are no longer police officers!
So, either keep the name calling out of posts, or stop posting. Enough said.

 

[NotUrsula]

By your thoughts, none. But, it does match the name to the boarding pass. It keeps people from boarding with a pass that they may have stolen or obtained through some other method.

No, not really. Most college bars have more sophisticated equipment for verifying the authenticity of ID's than a TSO does. Passport control is another matter, but if someone serious wants to get onto a domestic flight with a fake ID it really isn't all that difficult.

Also, it is quite easy to photoshop a home-printed boarding pass, especially if you happen to have an old one from the same airline to use to cut and paste.

 

[CPT Tripss]

How are you tax dollars protecting airline revenue? Let's say Goofy4tink can't use her ticket from LAX to MCO and decides to give it to gmeh1. If the TSA Airport Security Screener stops her at the checkpoint, then the screener is performing the same airline revenue protection function as the happens at the baggage check/boarding pass counter. No aircraft security in all of this, just one less passenger flying or bumped.

 

[gmeh1]

How are you tax dollars protecting airline revenue? Let's say Goofy4tink can't use her ticket from LAX to MCO and decides to give it to gmeh1. If the TSA Airport Security Screener stops her at the checkpoint, then the screener is performing the same airline revenue protection function as the happens at the baggage check/boarding pass counter. No aircraft security in all of this, just one less passenger flying or bumped.

I can take that point, however, what if Goofy had her ticket/boarding pass stolen by gmeh and there was no one there to check it and gmeh was a terrorist with a carry on and the TSA did not exist. I know you don't like the TSA and don't think they are useful at all, but, I happen to like them and considering the other things my tax dollars are being used for, I am more than happy to pay the security fee. If they want to double check at the gate, IMHO, go for it. I worked at the airport, I had to have a complete background check and fingerprints by the TSA to work there. If it saves one life, then anything paid is worth it. If it discourages another 911, then it is worth it. I don't consider it an infringement on my rights as I know the rules before I choose to fly. I have a choice of transportation from point a to b, I choose to fly ( I like to get where I am going as quickly as possible). We all have a choice of transportation. If you don't like the rules, then you don't have to choose flying. It is so simple. Complaining about it does not and will not change the fact that it exists. It just breeds negativity and frankly, who needs that?

 

[gmeh1]

No, not really. Most college bars have more sophisticated equipment for verifying the authenticity of ID's than a TSO does. Passport control is another matter, but if someone serious wants to get onto a domestic flight with a fake ID it really isn't all that difficult.

Also, it is quite easy to photoshop a home-printed boarding pass, especially if you happen to have an old one from the same airline to use to cut and paste.

I was more thinking about theft at the airport, you would be amazed at what people forget in the bathrooms or drop when walking.
Not a lot of chance to obtain a fake Id or a photo shopped boarding pass.

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

"Thugs" really? Those thugs put up with a lot of crap on a day to day basis, they do a pretty good job screening carry-ons. They do not just stand around any more than "real law enforcement" eat doughnuts all day. I realize you are a big time flier and car renter, but, those facts don't make you an expert on the TSA or Car Rental agencies. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion and I respect that, but, I totally disagree.

When they quit SCREAMING at people and treating people like dirt I will quit calling them thugs. (And as for eating donuts I saw a TSA agent at MCO recently who had to weigh 300 pounds.... )

The TSA has large numbers of employees who think that they have been given a HECK of a lot more power then they have.

I travel weekly. I am amazed at what people put up with from the TSA. I just look at the "I made up a new rule" jerk and say "may I see your supervisor" AMAZING how quickly they back down, but I don't... I still see the supervisor LOL!

I am very polite to these people, but they don't get to play "it's Tuesday so today we won't allow corkscrews" or other fun games with me.

My personal fav was the agent who told me I should have my hair cut changed to match my Driver's License photo. Wonder what he wants my partner to do? Have implants? I think once you are bald it's kind of "gone" But the "well trained" agent apparently can only identify folks by their hairstyle???? LOL!

I actually know someone who was a TSA agent. She quit because her supervisors was a "thug" who abused passengers for his personal enjoyment... and made his employees miserable with this "rule of the day" games. (one day he told them to patdown anyone wearing a red shirt for example because it was a gang color... Yeah that's effective. As long as the terrorist wears blue that day he's probably safe! )

 

[NotUrsula]

I was more thinking about theft at the airport, you would be amazed at what people forget in the bathrooms or drop when walking.
Not a lot of chance to obtain a fake Id or a photo shopped boarding pass.

Sure, but that's not exactly how a determined terrorist is going to go about getting attempting to get onto a flight, now is it? (Or, if it is, he or she is setting a new record for stupid.) A thief, sure, but unless it's a foreign flight, there is no reason for TSA to care about that from a security POV.

As to using someone else's ticket, yes, that is a revenue-protection situation. THERE is absolutely NO security interest in preventing someone from *openly* selling or gifting an unusable ticket if the airline is notified in advance that you have done so. For security, as long as you know who the passenger is and what he or she has on his person at the time, who cares where he got the ticket?

In this age of computers, there is no other reason besides revenue protection for an airline to refuse to transfer a paid-for ticket from one passenger to another with advance notice. It takes something like 15 seconds and 10 keystrokes to do it. They could charge a $10 change fee and make a fortune off of small business passengers, but no, they want to be able to sell that seat twice, and they want TSA to help them enforce that.

I've travelled domestically MANY times on someone else's ticket. Any business flyer with any experience at all knows how to do it; as it is very simple. It is done quite frequently to avoid losses on non-refundable tickets, and even random checks at the gate won't prevent it.

 

[CPT Tripss]

I can take that point, however, what if Goofy had her ticket/boarding pass stolen by gmeh and there was no one there to check it and gmeh was a terrorist with a carry on and the TSA did not exist. I know you don't like the TSA and don't think they are useful at all, but, I happen to like them and considering the other things my tax dollars are being used for, I am more than happy to pay the security fee. If they want to double check at the gate, IMHO, go for it. I worked at the airport, I had to have a complete background check and fingerprints by the TSA to work there. If it saves one life, then anything paid is worth it. If it discourages another 911, then it is worth it. I don't consider it an infringement on my rights as I know the rules before I choose to fly. I have a choice of transportation from point a to b, I choose to fly ( I like to get where I am going as quickly as possible). We all have a choice of transportation. If you don't like the rules, then you don't have to choose flying. It is so simple. Complaining about it does not and will not change the fact that it exists. It just breeds negativity and frankly, who needs that?

While I have criticized the Airport Security Screeners for over zealousness and power tripping, I never advocated against security measures at airports. I can't imagine no security. No way to respond to your multi-"if" hypothetical.

I really don't think any of us truly "know the rules" because too often TSA hides behind Sensitive Security Information as the reason for not publicizing rules and they are not consistently enforced from checkpoint to checkpoint and airport to airport. The days of having 500 ml of medically necessary liquid passed through on the first leg of a trip and then rejected on the second leg need to end.

The SIDA badging requirements and background checks for airport employees are really minimal. Nothing more than a criminal records check with fingerprints and a cross match with the TSA data base. No interview, no reference check (heck, you don't even need to supply references). But, it's better than nothing.