Slashdot Mirror
Damaged US Passport Chip Strands Travelers
caseih writes "Damaging the embedded chip in your passport is now grounds for denying you the ability to travel in at least one airport in the U.S. Though the airport can slide the passport through the little number reader as easily as they can wave it in front of an RFID reader, they chose to deny a young child access to the flight, in essence denying the whole family. The child had accidentally sat on his passport, creasing the cover, and the passport appeared worn. The claim has been made that breaking the chip in the passport shows that you disrespect the privilege of owning a passport, and that the airport was justified in denying this child from using the passport."
TFA states that it was an airline official who refused to allow the passenger to board, not an agent of the government. It's still galling, but let's express our discontent where it belongs.
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
“This is done for national security, for whatever reason they can’t make an exception, period,”
They flew from Denver to Dallas without a problem, then were stopped in Dallas. If they can't make an exception, why were they allowed to get on the first plane?
Is 1563649 a prime number?
Paper
Can survive being crushed, sat on, folded, spun, submerged in water, thrown up on, run over by a car, heated to several hundred degrees, frozen to near absolute zero, exposed to intense radiation, and the data stored on paper can be read with no special tools under a wide variety of environmental conditions, or using simple tools like a 'lens', can be read at distances of up to several hundred feet or more.
RFID
Can be used with a scanner that has a range of only a few inches. If any part of the chip is damaged, the data is irretrievable. Costs more than paper. Can be destroyed in everyday use, including sitting on it, folding it, getting it wet, etc.
Which one would you pick for storing sensitive information which, if made inaccessible, has the potential to prevent you from ever seeing your loved ones, your home, or any of your possessions again?
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I was traveling alone, but I've gotten similar crap from a AA rep with a bur up his butt or something. This was pre-chip passport, but my well traveled 9 1/2 year old passport was slightly bowed from being placed in my pocket. He said basically the same thing as the article, that it shows a disrespect for the document and that I should keep it in a necklace type holder or somewhere else other than my back pocket. This same passport was never questioned by a government official in any country I traveled too. I waited for the douche to go on break and then proceeded to check in without incident by another agent. He would probably be one to charge folks an excessive baggage fee if one of their bags was 1 oz over regulation as well.
The travel guy they interview has one thing right and one thing wrong...
Not all passports have RFID chips in them. That didn't start until 2006. Mine has no such chip in it. No problems at all with it. Even without the RFID chip, the passport is machine readable (that's the barcode on the picture page). It won't be until 2016 that all US passports--that is, when the old ones all expire, finally--will be biometric/RFID. So I don't see why they should refuse someone who's RFID chip doesn't work, given that other people will be allowed on without one too.
But he is right that the passport is property of the US government. It says that in the document somewhere.
A colleague of mine had major problems with Delta and his visa. He was going to China, and had a return flight 60 days after he left. His visa was only good to stay 30 days. They refused to let him on the plane. Of course, he had planned to go to Hong Kong after 28 days, stay for 3, and then return to mainland China (possible with his multiple entry visa), all of which is fully legal. Delta didn't care and made him change his flight (and pay to do so). He then had to pay a second time to change it back once he got to China. His CC refunded the fees, but it was still unnecessary hassle.
The major issue: airlines are NOT immigrations officials! They do have some responsibility, of course. They don't want people getting on planes without passports, only to have them sent back home immediately. Still, on judgment calls like validity of visa and travel plans, they should not have final say in the matter. That's not their job. They don't always get it right.
The family may have made a mistake not immediately calling for a customs agent to get involved. The airline could easily take them downstairs, where there's dozens of immigrations officers, any of whom could make the judgment. There's also probably a supervisor there who gets final say. Why were those people not called in to decide the validity of the passport?
I know this will go unheeded because it's what people don't want to hear, but the US Government had nothing to do with this case.
The child was denied clearance by an airline employee, not an actual customs agent. And the person who claims that a damaged passport is "disrespect" to the privilege of holding a passport is some whackjob I've never heard of who owns a small business that specializes in... wait for it... passports and visas! The online ratings for this guy's business classify him as a Grade A jackass, as well.
This is an overblown, almost-manufactured attempt at criticizing the government for its national security policies. It's really much more akin to blaming the local beef farmer because my steak was overcooked.
From TFS: The claim has been made that breaking the chip in the passport shows that you disrespect the privilege of owning a passport, and that the airport was justified in denying this child from using the passport.
"The claim has been made", eh? Citation needed. Who made this claim? I RTFA and that line does not appear. I watched the video linked in TFA and that line was not spoken.
If this is really a statement from someone in the US Government, then who said it, and when?
My blood began to boil at the thought of someone in government saying such a thing. If this quote is true, this person is saying a passport is more precious than the flag of the USA, because there are at least some circumstances where it is legal to destroy a flag. But the whole passive voice thing and the total lack of attribution makes me wonder if this isn't just a made-up quote.
If it's for real, give us a real cite. Let's get a tidal wave of negative publicity pointed at the person who said this.
If it's not for real, let's not get all excited over nothing.
P.S. TFA quoted some guy as saying that the government has "no reason in the world" to let you fly if the passport has a damaged chip. He likened it to a passport with the photo cut out. But I don't really know exactly who this guy is or why we should give his opinion any weight. I don't know what the actual government policy is on a passport that is clearly readable, with numbers and barcodes and such all intact but a damaged chip; it's hard to imagine that this is the actual official government policy. And if it is, I'd like a citation of that, please.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
If the government had not have created this police state, then airlines wouldn't give a damn.
This is my sig.
The law disagrees completely - http://law.justia.com/cfr/title22/22-1.0.1.6.33.5.5.1.html. Note there are grounds for denying a passport, but there are also grounds for puttting you in prison - that doesn't mean not being in prison is a priviledge.
Or if you prefer statements made to the public of how the government interpretes the law:
- http://travel.state.gov/passport/ppi/family/family_864.html
Heck it uses the word "entitled"!
quoted from http://travel.state.gov/passport/passport_2788.html#One
What will happen if my Electronic Passport fails at a port-of-entry?
The chip in the passport is just one of the many security features of the new passport. If the chip fails, the passport remains a valid travel document until its expiration date. You will continue to be processed by the port-of-entry officer as if you had a passport without a chip.
Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
1st world: United States and allies during the cold war.
2nd world: Soviet Union, China, and allies during the cold war.
3rd world: Any nation not listed in the above two categories.
Look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_world
just an analog boy living in a digital age.
Little Kye’s passport has a crease on the back cover, which Gosnell says came from him accidentally sitting on the passport. His passport was questioned, but not denied. It was Kyle Gosnell’s that was the real problem. It has a small crease on the back cover, and is overall weathered and worn.
The child's passport was NOT denied, it was Kyle (presumably the father) who had the "overall weathered and worn" passport that was denied. It's hard to believe that his passport was so weathered and worn that it couldn't be read so this is probably still an issue of an airline employee with a stick up his ass but TFS is completely wrong and trolling everyone who comments on here enraged. TFA doesn't even say that the RFID chip had ANYTHING to do with his being denied. Parent is absolutely right that the person who is quoted has NOTHING to do with this situation. The local Fox team reporting on this probably Googled someone in the Denver area (not the Dallas area where this whole f'ing thing actually happened) and asked this nutjob for a quote for their story.
PLEASE RTFA before commenting. Slashdot editors, PLEASE edit these retarded submissions before they get our collective panties in a wad.
...if you're going for a car analogy.
http://travel.state.gov/passport/faq/faq_1741.html
Q:My passport has been damaged. Can I continue to use this passport?
a:If your passport has been significantly damaged, especially the book cover or the page displaying your personal data and photo, you will need to apply for a new passport. You will need to submit the following in person (See Where to Apply):
The damaged passport
Form DS-11
All documents required by Form DS-11, including citizenship documentation (i.e. birth certificate)
Water damage, a significant tear, unofficial markings on the data page, missing visa pages (torn out), a hole punch and other injuries may constitute "damage" requiring use of Form DS-11.
Normal wear of a U.S. passport is understandable and likely does not constitute "damage". For instance, the expected bend of a passport after being carried in your back pocket or fanning of the visa pages after extensive opening and closing. In most cases of normal wear, you may renew your passport by mail using Form DS-82.
Please remember, if you try to renew a significantly damaged passport using Form DS-82, you may be asked by the Passport Agency to apply again using Form DS-11 and incur additional fees./
From http://law.justia.com/cfr/title22/22-1.0.1.6.33.html#22:1.0.1.6.33.1.3.1
22 C.F.R. PART 51—PASSPORTS
Title 22 - Foreign Relations
PART 51—PASSPORTS
51.6 Damaged, mutilated or altered passport.
Any passport which has been materially changed in physical appearance or composition, or contains a damaged, defective or otherwise nonfunctioning electronic chip, or which includes unauthorized changes, obliterations, entries or photographs, or has observable wear and tear that renders it unfit for further use as a travel document may be invalidated. [ Note that this says MAY, and more to the point does not say IS... so a revocation judgement has to be made by.... ]
51.4 Validity of passports. ... ONLY IF, in the judgement of the State Dept, the mutilation warrants revocation ]
(h) Invalidity. A United States passport is invalid whenever:
(1) The passport has been formally revoked by the Department; or [
(2) The Department has registered a passport reported either in writing or by telephone to the Department of State, or in writing to a U.S. passport agency or to a diplomatic or consular post abroad as lost or stolen.
(3) The Department has sent a written notice to the bearer at the bearer's last known address that the passport has been invalidated because the Department has not received the applicable fees.
Improper visas or clearly wrong authorizations is one thing, but the intrinsic validity of a properly issued passport to its proper owner is clearly not a decision delegated to airline staff. That judgement is for immigrations or passport officials to make, not some Jetway jockeys who've mistaken themselves for State Department employees. Seems to me that a lawsuit for injunctive relief is perfectly appropriate -- specifically to prevent AA or other airline staff from making legal declarations about the invalidity of a passport. And it's not like this would be burdensome, either: If Jetway Jane sees that you don't posses a passport or a visa for a destination that requires one, you've violated the terms on your ticket, and will be denied boarding because it's a ticketing issue. But If Jetway Joe thinks your passport might be invalid, he should call the resident officials at the airport to make a determination -- not try to impersonate them.
I think not...(*poof*)
The federal government requiring Catholics to pay for other people's contraception.
This is not true. The federal government is requiring ALL employers to offer health insurance or pay a fine, and all health insurance offered must pay for contraception.
The federal government is not, however, requiring anyone to be an employer.
paintball