Slashdot Mirror


US Imposes Stricter Security Screenings At Foreign Airports, But Won't Expand Laptop Ban Yet (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The United States will require foreign airports to implement stricter security practices and screenings for any passengers headed to the U.S. John Kelly, the U.S. secretary of Homeland Security, announced today that the new measures were being put in place. Though he didn't go into specifics, Kelly said the new requirements would include further screenings of electronics, more thorough vetting of passengers, and measures meant to stop "insider attacks." The U.S. is also encouraging the use of more bomb-detecting dogs, "advanced checkpoint screening technology," and the addition of "preclearance" locations, which station U.S. customs officers overseas, allowing them to screen passengers before boarding instead of after they land. One thing Kelly didn't announce was an expansion of the tablet and laptop ban, which is currently in effect on flights from 10 airports in the Middle East and North Africa. If airports don't comply with the new screening rules, Kelly said, they may be subject to additional electronics bans. But for the time being, it sounds like the ban will be kept to those 10 locations. According to Reuters, airlines have 21 days to comply with the new rules for explosives screenings and four months to comply with everything else.

11 of 64 comments (clear)

  1. Where is this terror over terrorism coming from? by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the past ten years, there has been one successful plane bombing. When the fuck are voters going to grow up and realize it's not something anyone should worry about?

    Something like 10,000 people are murdered with guns every year in the US, yet we hear NOTHING about banning laptops on guns!

  2. Re:2nd security checkpoint by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Informative

    So this means that every airport with US-bound flights needs to have a 2nd security checkpoint just for the US-bound gates ?

    Many of them already do. When I flew from Munich to the US last time, I went through three different security screenings. And I'm not counting the interrogation that takes place before they even let you into the check-in line, or the outbound customs and immigration folks.

  3. Really looking forward to high speed rail by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I basically avoid airports now unless I am traveling more than 8 hours by car. It was barely worth it before, it's absolutely not worth it anymore. I submit to airport screenings for international travel, but travel is just miserable now, knowing you have to go through that degrading experience, and will have to do it again on the way home.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  4. This is stupid by t4eXanadu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because if I were a terrorist who wanted to reach my target in the US, I would just fly out of another country that isn't on the list. Maybe even one with less strict security. Problem solved. So, explain to me how this is going to protect us?

    1. Re:This is stupid by sit1963nz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the government actually wanted to protect "people" they would be:
      Tightening up on Medical procedures, Death by medical misadventure kills hundreds of thousands in the US each year.
      Tightening up on motor vehicle safety and driver safety which kills tens of thousands in the US each year
      Tightening up on pollution which kills tens of thousands in the US each year
      Tightening up on sugar which kills tens of thousands in the US each year
      Tightening up on Gun control which kills about 15,000 a year
      etc etc etc then we get to
      Provide better protection against lightening strikes which kills more US people than terrorism
      Provide better protection against shark attacks which kills more US people than terrorism
      Provide better protection against tipping vending machines which kills more US people than terrorism

      The security theatre has zero to do with making US citizens safer, it is simply part of the system where by they over hype the problem, offer a solution and use that to actually remove peoples rights to freedom and privacy .

      Scared people will listen and obey anyone who seems to offer a solution that will make them "safe" , even when that means giving up their rights.
      People are stupid.

  5. Re:2nd security checkpoint by TFlan91 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yea, Munich has quite the security whenever I visit home.

    Not all of them do though. Iceland is pretty relaxed, and they are ramping up flights to and from the States.

    However, this is pure ridiculousness. I absolutely hate traveling home, I'm going to hate it even more now and I'm an American. I can't imagine how many foreigners just won't even bother anymore.

    I'm not even sure I want to bring my hard drives for work any more. I encrypt them of course, but just the thought of an image they could spend limitless resources trying to break, for god knows what reason, I think I'll just keep stationary hard drives and find a more private and secure cloud service.

  6. Re:Where is this terror over terrorism coming from by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ahahahahahahaha, nice one! You do mean this satirically, right? Because otherwise you would ignore overwhelming evidence that all this security theater has no relevant effect except inconveniencing travelers and keeping people out that are not dangerous but have opinions the US administration does not like.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  7. Re:Restore sanity: screen by race and religion by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, just as long as you realize that according to data, common sense, and not caring if we offend them, we should be banning white men from getting guns.

  8. Re:2nd security checkpoint by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    The message is what is received, not what it sent. If you explain the difference between a raisin and a grape ten times to a monkey, he will still not give a fuck and eat them both.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Re:Where is this terror over terrorism coming from by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have a rock here, it protects you from tiger attacks. I have never been attacked by a tiger, since I had that rock.

    Aside of that, no. The airline industry would not disintegrate. Traveling by plane is about as uncomfortable, as inconvenient, as cumbersome and as fucked up as it ever was. Especially when traveling to, from or in the US. I honestly don't know a single person who enjoys it. Not one. Anyone who can somehow avoid traveling by air already does so. People willingly replace air travel by train or even bus if at all possible. We do have airport bombings, which is pretty much the same deal as far as travelers are concerned since they have to go through airports to get to planes. And still people travel by plane.

    People already don't want to travel by plane. They pretty much have to.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  10. Re:2nd security checkpoint by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not the world, just the people willing to put up with this shit by travelling to the US, just go else where done and finished. No strip search, no stolen digital gear, no interrogations, not data mining, no illegally installed software on your devices, no rude and arrogant customs, just don't go.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen