"opting out" an expensive option

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

User avatar
KAG
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:24 pm

"opting out" an expensive option

Post by KAG »

I just saw a quick blurb on the news concerning the TSA and how they can now fine a person for "opting out" up to $11,000!!!! WTF is going on in the land of the not-so-free and home of the brave.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The feet you step on today might be attached to the ass you're kissing tomorrow.
Chase lifestyle not metal.
aviator2010
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:19 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by aviator2010 »

looks like your free and clear with the pilots exepmtion
---------- ADS -----------
 
Panama Jack wrote:I'm afraid I will have to agree with aviator2010
prop2jet
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 596
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:50 am

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by prop2jet »

aviator2010 wrote:looks like your free and clear with the pilots exepmtion
There is no exemption for pilots. At present, in the U.S. if the TSA asks you to go through a Body Scanner and you "OPT OUT" you get the full "Pat Down". If you walk through the metal detector and it "Beeps" guess what? You get to be groped as well. Your only choice is whether you would like to have this done in full view of the public or in private.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Bushav8er
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 936
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:37 am
Location: Northern Can

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Bushav8er »

Try this, get a job on the ramp as a means to freely access your aircraft for your real job as a pilot.

I really question the ability of the 'minimum skills, minimum educated' TSA agents to actually find anything using a 'pat-down/grope' method. The bad guys are way smarter than any agent. Are you going to allow any of the agents pat-down/grope your under 18 kids, especially since the background checks are so thorough?

How does EL AL airlines do it? They need good security and, as far as I know, they haven't had any problems.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
FlaplessDork
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:50 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by FlaplessDork »

Bushav8er wrote:How does EL AL airlines do it? They need good security and, as far as I know, they haven't had any problems.
It's all about profiling with EL AL. You get profiled when you buy your ticket against a database. You get behaviour profiled driving into the airport grounds. You get profiled walking into the terminal. You get profiled at check in, and walking aboard the plane. If you set off alarms you and your bags are discretely whisked away to a special bomb proof room and interrogated further. No lock downs, and no panic. You'd never know if there was a bomb scare there. Its all about having less security personnel but highly training the personnel you have.

It's not racial profiling by the way, but behaviour profiling.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by FlaplessDork on Sun Nov 21, 2010 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bushav8er
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 936
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:37 am
Location: Northern Can

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Bushav8er »

FlaplessDork wrote:
Bushav8er wrote:How does EL AL airlines do it? They need good security and, as far as I know, they haven't had any problems.
It's all about profiling with EL AL. You get profiled when you buy your ticket against a database. You get behaviour profiled driving into the airport grounds. You get profiled walking into the terminal. You get profiled at check in, and walking aboard the plane. If you set off alarms you and your bags are discretely whisked away to a special bomb proof room and interrogated further. No lock downs, and no panic. You'd never know if there was a bomb scare there. Its all about having less security personnel but highly training the personnel you have.

It's not racial profiling by the way, but behaviour profiling.
Now that, combined with other methods, makes sense.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
FlaplessDork
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:50 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by FlaplessDork »

---------- ADS -----------
 
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2105
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by TG »

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/congressme ... d=12192559
....In a statement, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced new procedures that it says will streamline airport security.

Pilots in uniform on airline business will be allowed to pass through airport security by showing two photo IDs. The identification will be cross-checked against a flight crew database.

"Allowing these uniformed pilots, whose identity has been verified, to go through expedited screening at the checkpoint just makes for smart security and an efficient use of our resources," TSA Administrator John Pistole said in a statement.....
"and an efficient use of our resources"

Finally :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
ogc
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:52 am

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by ogc »

Its also worth pointing out that it takes no more than 30 minutes (apparently) to check in and get on a plane there.
---------- ADS -----------
 
teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2450
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by teacher »

TG wrote:http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/congressme ... d=12192559
....In a statement, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced new procedures that it says will streamline airport security.

Pilots in uniform on airline business will be allowed to pass through airport security by showing two photo IDs. The identification will be cross-checked against a flight crew database.

"Allowing these uniformed pilots, whose identity has been verified, to go through expedited screening at the checkpoint just makes for smart security and an efficient use of our resources," TSA Administrator John Pistole said in a statement.....
"and an efficient use of our resources"

Finally :wink:
Will a Canadian RAIC be considered appropriate? We are not elegable for Crewpass with our RAIC so will this be for us too?
---------- ADS -----------
 
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
Spokes
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1057
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:22 pm
Location: Toronto, On

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Spokes »

ogc wrote:Its also worth pointing out that it takes no more than 30 minutes (apparently) to check in and get on a plane there.
If you are talking about Tel Aviv, then no, it takes longer. Just came back from there. 2 hours from airport entry to waiting at the gate. Many checkpoints, many people with guns. No patdown, no nude xray photo thingy. All the rest said above seemed to be about right though.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Wahunga!
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2105
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by TG »

teacher, I have no idea what kind of "flight crew database" they are talking about.
At list it's a start and hopefully it will snowball in Canada and also to Canadians flying in the States !?
---------- ADS -----------
 
teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2450
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by teacher »

I figured it'd be so new the rules wouldn't be known. I'm just assuming that it would apply to US crews only.
---------- ADS -----------
 
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
Changes in Latitudes
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2396
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:47 am
Location: The weather is here, I wish you were beautiful.

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Changes in Latitudes »

Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
loopa
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:57 am

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by loopa »

"just use your head"
Yup, it honestly is that simple. But since when did politicians use their head? :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
V1 Rotate
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Fragrant Harbour

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by V1 Rotate »

---------- ADS -----------
 
"I have control!"
coreydotcom
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:41 am
Location: Montreal

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by coreydotcom »

What I always wondered is why the standards are not the same from place to place?

For example: Montreal to Holguin, Cuba.

In Montreal you get the full normal security treatment, including not allowed to bring liquids on the plane.

When departing Cuba, the same guy who checks the whole plane, who makes the whole plane pay for the departure tax is the same guy waving everyone through the metal detector into the "secure" area. So basically, last time I went, I brought my rum back in my carry on because I figured it had less chances to break.

So my question is, if you were legally in Canada, and legally allowed to travel to Cuba, oh yeah... and a terrorist, why wouldn't you just go on a little cuban vacation, make your bomb over there and blow s**t up on the way home?

I find that if they don't screen you when returning from Cuba they shouldn't bother with you when you're going to Cuba.


my 2 cents.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Brown Bear
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:17 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Brown Bear »

I am seriously considering (not shitting you here, I'm dead serious!) buying a ticket to Toronto from Winnipeg, and removing all my clothes, right down to my carefully selected, clean boxers, dumping all my clothing on the cute little plastic trays, and sauntering through the metal detectors. We need to stop this stupidity! If everybody did this, imagine the chaos it would cause! Hell, it would all be perfectly legal! Imagine the entertainment value!
:bear: :bear:
---------- ADS -----------
 
The best "Brown Bear" of them all!
Image
flyingcatfish
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by flyingcatfish »

I think I'll just eat chili the night before I have to fly, and avoid parking a deuce before the flight, and when the TSA guy gets around to patting me down I'll fart in his face...
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
kzcvtm
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:05 am
Location: North of CYKZ

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by kzcvtm »

flyingcatfish wrote:I think I'll just eat chili the night before I have to fly, and avoid parking a deuce before the flight, and when the TSA guy gets around to patting me down I'll fart in his face...
Then you'll be held for administering a noxious substance... :lol: :smt040
---------- ADS -----------
 
ogc
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:52 am

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by ogc »

Brown Bear wrote:I am seriously considering (not shitting you here, I'm dead serious!) buying a ticket to Toronto from Winnipeg, and removing all my clothes, right down to my carefully selected, clean boxers, dumping all my clothing on the cute little plastic trays, and sauntering through the metal detectors. We need to stop this stupidity! If everybody did this, imagine the chaos it would cause! Hell, it would all be perfectly legal! Imagine the entertainment value!
:bear: :bear:

Well Mr. Bear.

A pornstar in Seattle has beaten you to this.

And she videotaped it,

This is not safe for viewing at work.

http://vimeo.com/17057322

While not full nude, I think see through underwear us as close as you can get.
---------- ADS -----------
 
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by grimey »

The problem with El Al's model (which is great) is that it doesn't scale well. El Al is a TINY airline in comparison to most international airlines, with 35 aircraft. Air Canada looks huge by comparison. They have the ability to profile every passenger due to the limited number of passengers they have. If you tried to implement the same system for all passengers going through JFK, the airport would grind to a halt.

But on with the TSA hatred:

---------- ADS -----------
 
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
Tim
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1026
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 6:16 pm

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by Tim »

Changes in Latitudes wrote:Image
that's awesome! sums things up nicely....
---------- ADS -----------
 
niss
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:54 pm
Location: I'm a CPL trapped in a PPL's Body.
Contact:

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by niss »

grimey wrote:The problem with El Al's model (which is great) is that it doesn't scale well. El Al is a TINY airline in comparison to most international airlines, with 35 aircraft. Air Canada looks huge by comparison. They have the ability to profile every passenger due to the limited number of passengers they have. If you tried to implement the same system for all passengers going through JFK, the airport would grind to a halt.
]
That's true if you are flying TO israel on El Al but if you want to access the ticket counter for any airline out of Ben Gurion you get the same treatment. Everyone flying out of Israel gets the same security.
---------- ADS -----------
 
She’s built like a Steakhouse, but she handles like a Bistro.

Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
. ._
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7374
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
Contact:

Re: "opting out" an expensive option

Post by . ._ »

Or another option is to just go back to pre-9/11 level security.

There were a few hijackings where people died, sure, but statistically it was safer than driving and you'd have a better chance of winning the 6/49 than getting killed by a terrorist.

How quickly we forget the good old days of freedom.

-istp :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”