Slashdot Mirror

You do realize they more-or-less do that now, right?

The TSA still has not caught a single terrorist trying to get on a plane.

Why do you say that? Here's how many guns the TSA caught at a few airports last year:

(ATL) - 111 Guns Discovered

(DFW) - 96 Guns Discovered

(IAH) - 68 Guns Discovered

(PHX) - 66 Guns Discovered

(DEN) - 51 Guns Discovered

Your assumption is that none of those people had terrorist intentions. But why do you assume it? The fact is they took actions that would have empowered them to take over the plane.

Because the "redress list" is for people who have a name which matches a suspected or known terrorist on the "no fly" list. In other words, (s)he wasn't on the "no fly" list, but (s)he was unfortunate enough to have the same name as someone who is. Since the "no fly" list is keyed by names and not an actual unique identifier, you can be "on" the list even though you're not.

This is much different than Dr. Rahinah Ibrahim, who was actually on the no fly list. While other Rahinah Ibrahim's would have been able to (and possibly would need to) get a redress number, she would be unable to obtain one.

http://www.tsa.gov/stakeholder...

You can **board airlines** with medicinal marijuana with your proof...the TSA doesn't bother you for small ammounts

Huh? Their own webpage suggests otherwise. It does say that they don't specifically look for it (nor should they), but will refer the matter to law enforcement. "*Screening procedures are governed by federal law and designed to detect threats to aviation security. TSA officers do not search for marijuana or other drugs; however, if an item is found that may violate federal law during security screening, TSA will refer the matter to law enforcement. Whether or not marijuana is considered medical marijuana federal law provides no basis to treat medical marijuana differently than non-medical marijuana."

Local LEOs might let you get away with it in a state with legalized and/or medical pot, but I personally wouldn't be brave enough to test that theory.

It seems strange that this kind of data isn't already publicly available. Putting it on a website is certainly more efficient... wait, HealthCare.gov.. well, maybe it'll be more efficient, it's a different department. But what bothers me is the illness portion of it, are they talking flu or incidents of cancer? If it's the latter then they need to first publish the information about the TSA employees in Boston and possible radiation exposure due to nudeo scanners. Of course the TSA says "uh huh" and says there's no correlation. Having the raw data of TSA employees and incidents of cancers or other diseases in comparison to the general population
would help in either affirming or putting to rest that what these folks are doing is not harming their health or the health of the traveling public. I would also carry it into the various branches of the Military as well and not just look towards the private sector as being the worst offenders when in fact some of our weapon systems have been know to kill our own members of the military. So, if they're going to do it, do it across the board and don't just single out private industry..

If those who are already trusted can proceed with minimal checks, then it would make it easier to check everyone else.

I wonder what a program like that would look like?

Basically, everything in that article is predicated on the claim that "we can't keep data", when in fact they can and do keep all manner of data. It's nothing but a disingenuous attempt to shift the blame away from the TSA and onto privacy groups and the public at large.

.. so now, because you can not build your own registry of American travelers, we are supposed to either submit to your useless, invasive procedures (that still can't detect things in body cavities) or "opt-in" to the Trusted Traveler program? Are those the two choices, Stewart? How about the TSA goes away and airline security is handed over to the airlines themselves.

The DHS and its bastard offspring the TSA would have our founding fathers rolling and vomiting in their graves. To say nothing of the NSA.

Link to the fucking TSA blog, not the idiotic morons at Network World: http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/09/tsa-travel-tips-tuesday-leave-your.html . Please do not click NW links, and if you must, be sure to have your ad blocker on.

You want to get rid of the TSA?

Don't fly.

Make sure you don't take a train or drive a car either. Of course the TSA says this is all a myth.

You must have very little faith in your fellow humans. I think it would be a rare person who wouldn't be motivated to save the lives of hundreds of people who were entrusted in his care.

OTOH, the unthinkable has happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

This is an example of why having pilots pass through TSA security is unneeded- a constant irritation for me. A proper in-depth background check is all that is necessary, accompanied by ongoing review.

You, too, can do what pilots do. I do. It's called TS PreCheck, and as a result, I show up at the airport (LAX usually), walk to an at-most 2 person line, drop my bag and cell phone on the belt, and walk through a metal detector. Security takes less than a minute, even if I have to wait for one other person in the lane. No removal of shoes, or taking off my coat, or taking my laptop out of my bag, etc. Just walk through a metal detector like back in the 90s...

I'm always surprised at the number of people who don't know about this, nor use it. I guess one thing to be thankful for is that I never have to wait for security, and I can arrive at the airport ~30 minutes before my flight starts to board, and am always at my gate just before boarding starts...

You don't have to toss your lighter. Unless it's a crack...um torch lighter.

I put my pocketknife and lighter in my checked baggage the night before, and carry a spare lighter I can toss once I get to the airport. (I've got a couple of almost empty disposables stashed for just that purpose.) I've never had a problem finding a light at my destination.

The problem isn't the TSA, the problem is the grandparent is an idiot who won't take responsibility for his own actions.

From the TSA website:

According to the TSA website you are currently allowed to carry a non-torch fuel lighter in your pocket as carry-on. You may also have up to two fuel lighters in your checked baggage that are either empty or in a TSA approved case. At one point in time all lighters were banned from checked or carry-on period. Matches were allowed, then they weren't and now they are again.

Are you checking un-fueled lighters? or are they in an approved case? Or have you just been lucky?

The problem is that the TSA are a bunch of fucking idiots, not the GGP. They don't exactly have a track record of hiring the best and brightest. Then they change the rules too frequently to even keep their own staff informed of what is going on, let alone waste time letting the public know. The bigger problem is that the TSA are a complete waste of time and money.

If the answer to the theater shooting in Aurora was that movie-goers should have been carrying guns, and the answer to school shootings is armed teachers, then why not airplanes? Wouldn't we all feel safer if everyone in an airplane was carrying an undetectable plastic gun?

This happened, but not in the way you describe. In 2003 the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) Program was enacted, allowing flight crew members to volunteer for training from the Federal Air Marshal Service and conceal carry on planes. A bit more info on the wiki page.

I can't speak to the rest of your post, but the rules for what items can be carried onto a plane change fairly frequently. Your data may have been superseded. I fly every week for business, and can attest to this. However don't take my word for it - a lighter can be lawfully carried onto a plane. With regard to video game consoles, there are rules for those, too. Even the rules for small knives and some sporting goods are changing. This is not to say that I think that I'm a fan of the TSA. I'm just providing more up-to-date information than what you have experienced that may help you to rephrase your premise. Also, from my experience, although the rules are published and are fairly consistent; how they are enforced is not. A good example of this is how rules are enforced in small regional airports. Generally, the TSA officers in the tiny regional airports have a lot of time on their hands to do things like re-run carry-ons through an x-ray machine, excluding my eyeglass cleaning fluid (etc).

You're wrong about the box cutters. Specifically called out and still banned.

http://www.tsa.gov/pil-sharpobjects

Don't go near the TSA blog. You might be exposed to illusion shattering reality like the 27 loaded firearms the TSA discovered among passenger carry-on last week.

I wouldn't buy a lottery ticket, you're not lucky really.

October of 2002 I took a flight. While passing through security, they sent my laptop bag through the scanner several times as they saw something but couldn't figure out what it was. A 5" lock back knife had fallen into the bottom of the bag under some padding. They tossed it into a box with all the other pocket knives they found and told me to enjoy my flight, not caring one bit. Maybe you would have had a problem the day after Richard Reid was caught, but I doubt it would have been much of an issue.

Instead of fixing the voting system, how about they first work on not deleting already answered petitions from the website or better yet, not deleting petitions right before they hit 25,000 votes.

Seriously, why did they delete the TSA response? Perhaps they realized that having the TSA administrator John Pistole respond to the "Dismantle the TSA" petition was the same as having no response at all?

10) Snakes, turtles, and birds were found at Miami (MIA) and Los Angeles (LAX). Iâ(TM)m just happy there werenâ(TM)t any lions, tigers, and bears

It's been tried already. Just like with anything else that gets enough votes, you'll get a long statement about why everything is already in place, and nothing further will be done.

It's not exactly "waved through security". If the airport has PreCheck (not all do) and you are at the PreCheck checkpoint (not all checkpoints are configured for it) then you'd be able to see it in action.

If you qualify for PreCheck for that flight when you get to security you don't have to take your laptop or liquids out of your bag, don't have to take your shoes, belt, or jacket, off, and walk through a metal detector not the porno scanner.Last time I went through security (at Denver International Airport) it took me 30 seconds from the time my boarding card was scanned to the time I was walking out the other end of the checkpoint with my stuff.

Neil

This risky barcode is only impacting passengers who have enrolled in Pre-Check. Pre-Check is an optional program that people can pay to join and try to expedite security screening. When enrolling in the program, background checks are completed which give the security goons some level of comfort that you are not a subversive, anti-American terrorist who's going to try to carry a 4oz bottle of liquid on the plane (http://www.tsa.gov/tsa-pre%E2%9C%93%E2%84%A2).

For the rest of us (e.g. the majority), our barcodes are used strictly by the airlines to board the plane. We are subjected to the "rigorous", non-barcode, security review of visually checking the printed information on our boarding pass like name, date, flight number, and gate accompanied by a trip through the privacy rights inhibitor machine. So while the barcodes could be modified, as the blogger pointed out, it would only be a potential risk to people who have already had a deeper dive on their background and history.

IMHO, the bigger risk seems to be the HTML delivery of a boarding pass that is printed at home. With limited HTML knowledge (or a simple web search), someone could modify the data points that security is visually checking prior to printing the boarding pass. Buy a ticket with one name. Pass through security with another.

The opt out process is not bad at all in the US. I always do that. The airport in Amsterdam may get nasty, I had to spend five minutes to explain that I do not want to go through a body scanner (I was the only one opting out).

Regardless of that, every time I go through security I have my video cameras ready along with the printouts from TSA site authorizing the use of video equipment:
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/taking_pictures.shtm

I take it as my civil duty to record any irregularities.

In all likelihood, it would be a service that would be available *IF YOU WANT IT*

Christ, people, if you suffer from this type of PARANOIA regularly, seek professional help.

Optional today, required tomorrow. But don't worry because it'll work with Android and Windows Phone 8, and you'll get to choose the software you like best!

Swearing about PARANOIA seems more than a little unfair since the government has tried this strategy -- but without the iPhone -- before. It looks like they're currently calling it TSA PreCheck but they'll probably change it to "PhoneCheck".

Yep. I even printed out the explicit allowance for them from the TSA Website to carry with me the first few times. I thought it odd that they allowed them when so many other things were banned, but decided to take full advantage of it. Now, after numerous trips, several of them through what I would think would be higher risk airports like Reagan, Dulles, and La Guardia, I've never even had an x-ray tech take a second look. Of course, as soon as I say that I know they WILL check next time, that's what I get for opening my big mouth...

Actually, yes. http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1252.shtm I use el cheapo aluminum when I travel, just in case, instead of my more expensive stainless or bamboo, but I've never been bothered about them at all.

Please for the love of all thats Holy make sure you maximize how "happy' the kid is.

1 dress the kid in clothes for Comfort Not Fashion
2 sort out enough "snax" to keep the kid fed
3 make sure you have enough changes for the kid (and please get a bag from the Staff to dispose of the "spent" changes)
4 invest in an airline capable power cable and earphones for the kids media device (have they started providing USB power ports in seats yet??
5 have a couple doses of any meds the kid is taking (allergy meds cough drops ect)

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/children/index.shtm ---- note you can carry meds as needed

The general problem on passenger aircraft is orders given by flight attendants over the speaker system that begin/end with "...in accordance with federal regulations..." are parroted and observed with no understanding of why they are in place.

Having the FAA remove the requirement that electronic devices are off does not solve the problem that commercial flying is laden with laws bearing heavy consequences that at times have no connection to common sense, like the electronic device issue.

Philip K Howard points out that the general problem goes much deeper than the FAA, but in the context of "rules on an airplane" the public is very comfortable blindly following laws seemingly without reason. If you disagree, try asking someone on board the next time you take off why you have to have the window shades up, or the seats upright, or the tray table stowed, etc.

Second, as mentioned in the summary, traveling by air is a giant PINA.

I think that if done right, rail travel could be cheaper than air travel and much more pleasant.

Much more pleasant... right up until TSA makes its VIPR program mandatory for trains and buses nationwide, at which point it loses the cachet of not subjecting you to a cavity search to travel.

Second, as mentioned in the summary, traveling by air is a giant PINA.

I think that if done right, rail travel could be cheaper than air travel and much more pleasant.

Much more pleasant... right up until TSA makes its VIPR program mandatory for trains and buses nationwide, at which point it loses the cachet of not subjecting you to a cavity search to travel.

What kind of BS is this? Is this payed advertising from the FBI? Hackers = molester? Is sexual harassment part of government culture too? Next time select a better victim for libelous delusions, like astronauts or something. Certainly neither jock or tavern-slithering tough-guy has ever set a foul eye upon an innocent tart? Nope, only a putrid, pasty, libidinous hacker would do that. Yep, they MUST gain unauthorized access to your women. That's what it's all about. So hurry and unplug them before they've all been dragged down into the damp proverbial basement and irreparably ravaged by someone as terrible as Gary McKinnon! I can see it now:

"Put on the alien mask now!"

"....wince"

I also remember those airport security problems professor Mann had. I have to wonder whether he might be the sort of person that unintentionally escalates these situations. Or at least fails to effectively de-escalate them.

Would it similarly be "escalation" for a paraplegic to refuse to remove his prosthetic leg for airport security? The policy says they shouldn't have to, after all. (Admittedly, a policy which is apparently not followed.)

IIRC, TSA is funded not from taxes, but from "security fees" billed to the airlines.

Now, granted, the airlines pass that cost onto the consumers the same way retail businesses pass on the costs of sales taxes, so yeah, I guess you can call it a "tax," but it's not like it comes directly out of your paycheck.

Scanners belong in doctors' offices, not airports.

like Dr. Emma Garrison-Alexander?

[as a side note: in Germany, a Dr. in front of the name is an important status symbol, it is really unlikely to see a governing body of any bigger company/state agency/whatever with only one doctorate. Interesting, I saw your doctor comment and automagically expected lot's of Dr.'s, my German POV was wrong...]

FFS the Aussies will be required to be microwaved from July 2012 on. Just wonderful. Let's see the Australian Prime Minister go through a Pornoscanner.

Meanwhile, from http://blog.tsa.gov/ , this is a classic:

"Always pack your expensive dive equipment and accessories in your carry-on luggage."

Why? Because if you pack it in your luggage it may not be there when you pick up your luggage on the other side.

Let's go another one:
"Always pack your dive computers and regulators in carry-on luggage because these items are sensitive and do not need to be tossed around under the plane by baggage handlers"

So, here the TSA is admitting to damaging customer luggage and luggage contents. Great.

and this little gem:
"Always pack any prescription masks with you in carry-on luggage. If you lose this item it could ruin your whole trip."
Yeah, if someone stolelife saving medicine from me because I got on a plane and was stupid enough to put it in my locked luggage because it will possibly be stolen by the TSA I'd be upset. Well done captain obvious.

Alright, let's go one more:
"Do not forget the most important item! Make sure you lock your baggage with a TSA approved lock. This will prevent anyone from removing items out of your dive bags. "

Meaning that only the TSA is allowed to steal from your bags..

Why does anyone put up with the TSA antics?

Seriously, why haven't 100+ people just walked into an airport with sledgehammers and "fixed" the pornoscanners?

What could the government do if everyone participated in the destruction of these machines?

Incorrect.

It's not allowed to FAIL TO DECLARE that you have firearms in your checked luggage.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1666.shtm

Failure to adhere to the following regulations will preclude passengers from traveling with firearms, ammunitions or firearm parts:

        Travelers must declare all firearms to the airline during the ticket counter check-in process.
        The firearm must be unloaded.
        The firearm must be in a hard-sided container.
        The container must be locked. A locked container is defined as one that completely secures the firearm from being accessed. Locked cases that can be pulled open with little effort cannot be brought aboard the aircraft.
        If firearms are not properly declared or packaged, TSA will provide the bag to law enforcement for resolution with the airline. If the issue is resolved, law enforcement will release the bag to TSA so screening may be completed.
        TSA must resolve all alarms of checked luggage. If a locked container containing a firearm alarms, TSA will contact the airline, who will make a reasonable attempt to contact the owner and advise the passenger to go to the screening location. If contact is not made, the container will not be placed on the aircraft.
        If a locked container alarms during screening and is not marked as containing a declared firearm, TSA will cut the lock in order to resolve the alarm.
        Travelers should remain in the area designated by the aircraft operator or TSA representative to take the key back after the container is cleared for transportation.
        Travelers must securely pack any ammunition in fiber (such as cardboard), wood or metal boxes or other packaging specifically designed to carry small amounts of ammunition.
        Firearm magazines and ammunition clips must be securely boxed or included within a hard-sided case containing an unloaded firearm.
        Small arms ammunition, including ammunition not exceeding .75 caliber for a rifle or pistol and shotgun shells of any gauge, may be carried in the same hard-sided case as the firearm, as long as it follows the packing guidelines described above.
        TSA prohibits black powder or percussion caps used with black-powder.

Sure it is, at least in the US. Just have a hard case and follow proper declaration procedure.

As a matter of fact, yes: http://www.tsa.gov/research/reading/xray_screening_technology_safety_reports_jan_2012.shtm

This is the same thing that the TSA previously dismissed as "some guy" making a "crude attempt" at getting around screening procedures. At least they are acknowledging it now.

http://blog.tsa.gov/2012/03/viral-video-about-body-scanners.html

They have also said that these things are completely safe despite inadequate testing. Or that there are sufficient procedures in place to protect people's privacy. I wonder how long it will take for them to change their minds on that too.

So... wait... I have one issue here. Per TSA policy, ANYONE can REFUSE to use the advanced imaging technology and ELECT a putdown. If they FORCED her into the body scanner, that's assault. If she CHOSE not to elect the patdown, then she shares some culpability. Argue the merits of whether the patdowns are legal/appropriate/effective/etc., but, as I fly pretty often, I know for a *fact* that there are a litany of signs posted while going through security that advanced imaging technology is optional. If she was that concerned, she should have declined.

There doesn't need to be a law - airlines are private businesses. If you don't agree to their policies, they do not have to serve you.

But there is actually a law -
"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. Â 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. Â 1540.105(a)(2)."

The TSA has no jurisdiction over you in a private car...

How long do you think we'f have to wait until you have to qualify the statement above by "unless you are driving on a public road" -- after all, driving is "a privilege" as well, and TSA is not just A(viation)SA -- they have been operating on train stations, public transport, etc.

Straight from the horse's mouth: http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/highway/index.shtm

Also, google for VIPR teams, then come back to us, and, please, tell us how many other things are "just a privilege"...

Paul B.

Just take the train, eh? Sorry, TSA is there, too.

I know, let's take a boat! Oops, TSA is there, too.

Fuck it, let's just drive to our destination. Fuck! TSA is there, too!

Okay, fuck traveling, let's just go to a football game. Whaddaya know, TSA is there, too!

You cannot escape the TSA. Believe me, within a generation, you're going to need to submit to a TSA search every time you leave your fucking house. They already watch all your electronic communication so even being inside your home is not enough to escape the eye of TSAuron.

Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.

- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Just take the train, eh? Sorry, TSA is there, too.

I know, let's take a boat! Oops, TSA is there, too.

Fuck it, let's just drive to our destination. Fuck! TSA is there, too!

Okay, fuck traveling, let's just go to a football game. Whaddaya know, TSA is there, too!

You cannot escape the TSA. Believe me, within a generation, you're going to need to submit to a TSA search every time you leave your fucking house. They already watch all your electronic communication so even being inside your home is not enough to escape the eye of TSAuron.

Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.

- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Just take the train, eh? Sorry, TSA is there, too.

I know, let's take a boat! Oops, TSA is there, too.

Fuck it, let's just drive to our destination. Fuck! TSA is there, too!

Okay, fuck traveling, let's just go to a football game. Whaddaya know, TSA is there, too!

You cannot escape the TSA. Believe me, within a generation, you're going to need to submit to a TSA search every time you leave your fucking house. They already watch all your electronic communication so even being inside your home is not enough to escape the eye of TSAuron.

Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.

- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Just take the train, eh? Sorry, TSA is there, too.

I know, let's take a boat! Oops, TSA is there, too.

Fuck it, let's just drive to our destination. Fuck! TSA is there, too!

Okay, fuck traveling, let's just go to a football game. Whaddaya know, TSA is there, too!

You cannot escape the TSA. Believe me, within a generation, you're going to need to submit to a TSA search every time you leave your fucking house. They already watch all your electronic communication so even being inside your home is not enough to escape the eye of TSAuron.

Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.

- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

The fact that the girl was four years old is irrelevant.

It's actually extremely relevant that the girl was 4 years old. There is now policy around children under 12 that allows a great deal more flexibility which intelligent people can leverage to avoid this scenario.

I have, have you? The number of launches in the USA has steadily declined from mid-30s in the late 90s to 15-20 in the last few years.

Yes. I have. And the effectiveness and reliability of our space launches, missions, and systems is the best in the world. Not to sound trite, but quantity doesn't equal quality.

"Isolated anecdotes or complaints"?? The entire USA population is subject to be groped or looked at in the nude at the airport. These are not isolated anecdotes, this is every day life.

Yes, "isolated anecdotes or complaints". "Being looked at nude at the airport"? Really? The millimeter wave advanced imaging systems show a generic outline of a person with a box identifying a suspicious area. The backscatter X-ray systems have controls designed to enforce privacy.

And you can opt out of ALL advanced imaging. How do I know? Because I fly routinely, and opt out routinely — and no, I'm not "punished" or "targeted" because of it.

Either they exist only in your imagination or they are not very bright. All they need to do is point to the Patriot Act for a list.

Okay, please show me the "list". And yes, this is a rhetorical question. Most of the "Patriot Act" was simply updates to woefully outdated legislation. It is a very large act that impacted a large body of law, and very few of its provisions caused a large amount of controversy — and that's what happens in our legislative and judicial systems: panic and a rush when "something happens", give and take, controversy, and compromise until equilibrium is reached.

Among freedoms and rights lost are the freedom to fly without government issued ID

I flew without ID as a selectee numerous times until the TSA implemented a measure that disallows persons from refusing to show ID associated with a boarding pass simply because they feel like it. The TSA officer at the podium couldn't care less who you are. All they're looking at is to see that your ID matches a boarding pass. Yes, it's been demonstrated how this can be easily circumvented, but it's just one layer of security, and one of the ways that can help a No-Fly list be effective. Can it be defeated, and can you book a flight with a name not on the No-Fly list and use a fake ID? Or book a flight with a name belonging to a "real" ID with the wrong picture, and then create a fake boarding pass? Absolutely. Security experts have demonstrated this, and no doubt TSA's own red team activities has repeatedly documented such vulnerabilities. Is the concept of a No-Fly list, or ID/boarding pass matching perfect? Nope. But nothing is. And I'm perfectly open to arguments about effectiveness of the TSA in general. But is matching an ID to a boarding pass when the agent to whom you show it literally doesn't care who you are "taking away your rights"?

the freedom to take pictures of airports

False.

TSA does not prohibit the public, passengers or press from photographing, videotaping or filming at security checkpoints, as long as the screening process is not interfered with or slowed down.

False.

The content of the communications of US Persons is OFF LIMITS without a warrant. Interpreting the METADATA of communications has always been allowable without a warrant, which is REQUIRED to identify and discern the communications of non-US Persons, some of which travels via equipment and networks within the US, and does NOT require a warrant (and never has).

You don't have to trust me on this one, as parts of the Patriot Act have already been found unconstitutional by the courts.

The fact that a part(s) of ANY duly-passed legislation can be later found to be unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction is exactly how our system of law works.

Right, the Patriot Act has zer

    There's a limit of some sort. I'm pretty sure it's the total weight of the bag, just like any other checked luggage.

    I don't typically carry an assault rifle, since it's not usually what I need with me. :) I do carry a pistol and two loaded magazines. I pack it in a TSA/FAA compliant way.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1666.shtm

    The pistol has to be in a locked hard case.

    I have one of this hip pouch holsters, even though I don't actually use it. I leave both magazines loaded in it, with the zipper shut. You aren't suppose to store the ammunition with the pistol, so the magazines don't go in the locked hard case.

    The in-the-pants holster goes in the locked hard case with the pistol. The tactical (leg) holster gets left loose in the luggage. I bring both, so I'm prepared for which every carry method I need. I usually carry concealed. I like having the tactical holster somewhere close by, in case I need it.

    Both the hip pouch and the pistol case get put into my one checked luggage bag.

    When I get to the airport to depart, I move everything when I'm getting my bags out of the car. That way I can go straight to the ticket counter, declare it, and leave the bag with them.

    When I arrive at my destination and get my luggage, I check to make sure everything is still there. When I get to the rental car, I rearrange it to my normal non-tactical carry position. That's usually in my laptop bag, so I can reach it quickly if necessary.

    It may not seem quite right, but I ask to verify every time I check the luggage at the airport. If they want it packed differently, I'll work with them. Having the ammunition isn't a big deal. If they told me that I couldn't bring it, I'd politely hand it off to a LEO. I have not been asked to surrender the ammunition yet. I can always buy more when I get to my destination.

    I know their rules have changed. Not too long after 9/11, I had to open the locked case, so a LEO could inspect to verify the weapon was not loaded. More recently (in the last few years) my assurance that it is not loaded is all they require. In both cases, there's a very small form for me to sign, which goes in the luggage.

    The first time I flew with a weapon, I had a friend drive me to the airport, just in case I was told I was carrying wrong. My friend thought it was amazing. Because I declared a weapon, I got special treatment, which was amazingly polite. My bag doesn't just get tossed with the rest. It gets a personal escort for TSA screening. That's just so the screener knows there is a declared weapon.

    Last time I was departing home, there was another guy with a huge custom rifle case. Judging by the size of the case, he probably had something like a Barrett Arms 50 BMG of some model. It made my .45 ACP pistol look like a toy. His ammunition probably cost more than my weapon. :)

1. No more banned items: not sure about this one. Terrorists don't value any life-even their own. What makes him think only taking a whole airliner out is at stake. I'm betting they'd be willing to give their lives for just a few passengers being knifed to death and the resultant chaos and fear- it is terrorism after all.

2. Allow all liquids: I'd like to know more before I acquiesce. They're definitely trying to get explosives on board. He needs to assure us that his statements are true by citing the science behind his claims.

3. Give TSA officers more flexibility and rewards for initiative, and hold them accountable: Right after 9/11, the airline provided security was "fired". Remember those fine folks at Argenbrite? I'm not trying to denigrate anyone, but those employees of privately contracters were mostly high school dropouts that were immediately rehired by TSA- many, it was discovered later, had criminal records. Things have improved but ten years have passed- shouldn't things have progressed further?. Who wants to be a TSA officer? I doubt the government would pay enough to hire the quality individuals needed to implement this kind of approach. The professionalism has advanced leaps and bounds, but they still pay them poorly

4. Eliminate baggage fees: YES- the airlines often create their own problems, like this. However, this policy is in response to customer economic behaviors. They want CHEAP airfares, not quality products, forcing the airlines to nickle and dime the fare payers. Look at Spirit for how bad this has become. If we want this, it will have to be enacted and regulated by the government. Good luck in this political environment of Tea Partyism.

5. Randomize security: agreed, however, this will ultimately decrease security. The issue is how much is lost compared to how much convenience is gained.

As a pilot, I'm subjected to nearly the same security requirements as passengers. I find this to be a waste of time. Thankfully, we are making headway in the area of trust based security- the one thing Hawley felt was unworkable. The Registered Traveler program needs a second look. If we can trust crewmembers with our lives, then we can start adding passengers to the list of trusted individuals.