I had to make sure my Ginger Ale wasn't spiked with something to fully believe my eyes on this one. It looks like the TSA is kicking around the idea of risk management with passengers. Is hell really freezing over? Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41473962/ns/travel-business_travel/
Good news, if true. Now, to get the passport control officers to speed things up a little for non-US citizens
I am not looking forward to such TSA stupidity being implemented. It is an invitation to ineffectiveness and worse to pour lots more money in furtherance of a police state-style categorization of passengers done to supposedly pursue a type of criminal whose numbers seem statistically insignificant using a system that produces lots of "false positives" and doesn't eliminate "false negatives" and is akin to relying upon voodoo. "Just say no" to more TSA voodoo "security".
It's coming...... Source: http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/02/10/tsa.airport.screeners/index.html?eref=ib_travel
I, for one, am excited to see what changes may happen with a TSA trusted traveler program. I loved CLEAR, have no problem with as many background checks as they feel necessary, but let me leave the checkpoint with my shoes on my feet and my dignity intact. Hopefully the" trusted" program doesn't turn into the standard checkpoint routine with extra bs for non-trusted pax receiving an even more humiliating patdown!
TSA will screw up what DHS/CBP implemented effectively creating a truly effective value proposition for the traveler. I find it amazing that crossing our borders is so much easier than just traversing "security" to get on a domestic flight. Aside from the vasts sums of money that they will drop down the drain on this initiative, I am very concerned that TSA will strategically just give a little way on something like this (but still require you to remove shoes, laptop, get felt up, etc) and people will forget that there is still so much wrong with this setup and release the pressure currently on the agency. This is a group wholly out of control that absolutely needs to be reined in. We just can't afford them for so many reasons in this country.
You are already forced into it. (In)SecureFlight and the government's extrajudicial blacklisting of passengers are just that.
I am in favor of anything that can make getting through the security process and TSA that much easier. Risk based security and allocating your resources to concentrate on the people/items that you know less about makes actual sense. I wonder if the system will be something like this. 1. Trusted Travelers --- x-ray of bags only and remove your coat so that the agent can see if something looks amiss. Random checks to verify compliance with the rules. (also you can bring liquids and such with you) 2. Regular -- x-ray of bags -- nude-o'-scope -- enhanced patdown (current restricions apply) 3. Risky -- Backroom, glove snap Give free intial entry to the program to members of already established trusted traveler programs. Nexus/Global Entry Biometric gives access to the line.
You know exactly what I'm talking about; Secure Flight is not a trusted traveler program in the sense mentioned in the opening post of this thread.
Since this thread is based on a news article about what Pistole said, I stated what I did because of that. A "risk-management approach" is already in place exactly as I noted. Some might say it even already has 3 categories of supposed security "riskiness" for persons in a way: standard risk, high-risk and low-/no-risk. Also, (In)Secure Flight is being used to categorize passengers and it's harvested information will be used a lot more to categorize which flights get additional gate screening too even for the "best" categorized passengers who got cleared at the primary screening checkpoint. Such passengers are going to discover such preferential categorization doesn't result in any better treatment at the gate screenings than is the case for most of the other ordinary passengers too. [Pistole has not shown any practical desire to eliminate gate screenings of passengers who have already been cleared at the primary screening checkpoint -- rather he is making sure that more of them happen.] Given the number of terrorist attacks on US passenger flights in the past ten years and the number of passengers on US flights, it is pretty clear that almost all passengers have been no risk when it comes to flights. A "risk-management" approach that tries to create more than two categories of "risk" for a statistically insignificant risk is but a divide and rule strategy to "stay the course" with the TSA stupidity. When such an approach relies upon a system of photo ID presentation, that makes a "risk management" approach no less laughable given the ready supply of fraudulently-acquired/-used real government photo identification that the TSA accepts.
Let's put this another way .... I don't trust Pistole not to lie I don't trust TSA or their policies to protect the american citizen or any traveler for that matter I don't trust the DHS to manage the cowboys they have running TSA or to understand what true risk or how to manage it without trampling our rights or beliefs I don't trust Congress to rein in the mess they created with DHS and TSA any time in the near future, they are too busy worried if they'll get re-elected or whether they want a bit of tea with their next meal I don't trust the President to ever step out of his safe zone to make any type of significant change to the current process or organization, thus costing every american taxpayer significantly more than they can afford financially, emotionally or physically
Fish did a blog post today on the topic. http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/ Not sure I agree with his view.
Thinking about it more, you're right and I stand corrected. The re-introduction of the SSSS system does do just that. That's not an accurate statement. Were the 9/11 bad guys a risk when James Woods spotted them doing dry runs, sensed something bad, and went to the FBI about it? Would someone doing something similar right now be a risk, or do we need to wait until a plane goes down to officially deem someone as being a risk? That paragraph is hard to follow. There are two things there, I think. You're sort of saying that it's hard to mathematically calculate the likelihood of being a victim of a terrorist attack, and because of that, it's "stupid" for the TSA to check IDs?
You're not the only one to not trust our government. I don't. But if you're going to sit there and not deal with the cards you're dealt with, then you're more than welcome to remain there in that figurative fetal position and wait for a moment where we can all trust our government again. It ain't gonna happen.
Unsure where the fetal position comment comes from - the thread is about the trusted traveler program - my "list" is why I think the concept, and especially it's execution cannot be trusted, is a load of bull and will actually further reduce our freedome movement. There is nothing positive for anyone that can come of this program. What's fetal about that?
What I stated is an accurate statement, as anyone with a proper operational sense of statistics would know.
Okay, got it. Since we've moved away from commenting on the message and now talking about the messenger, I'll just move aside from this conversation now.
It may not be what i stated above, but i am hearing rumbling of some sort of significant reapproach to the system. The WBI is really slowing down the system, when it is in use. TSA is starting to realize the throughput of these systems is not what they need to actually create a system the creates a system where the masses comply and don't create a complete uproar. TSA will accept small uproars, but large scale ones have to be avoided. TSA has way too much invested in WBI to simply walk away from it (despite the fact it really doesn't work). They don't have enough people to make it work in any efficient manner. That is why they have moved to the new approach where you see the image as well. It gives them one more body for the line. It had nothing to do with the privacy side of the house as they stated. Secure Flight is not the categorized system that he is talking about. Simply put, with Secure Flight, they can identify the "risky" and "regular" passengers, but cannot seperate the "trusted" from the "regular". TSA may actually be begining to use a true risk based approach to security. I beleive that we need to watch what the CATSA does and look at their results. the CATSA and TSA seem to work together and really try to harmonize thier procedures. With the smaller number of passengers in Canada, it gives the TSA a chance to try new approaches to security, under the guises of the CATSA (creating cover), without causing a complete system meltdown. Currently, CATSA is creating NEXUS security lanes. This could be the first step in a roll out of a new approach. Just some more thoughts. ....
Print Topic
Print Topic
