Airlines Have to Ask Permission to Fly 72 Hours Early

twitter wrote to mention that the TSA (Transport Security Administration) has released a new set of proposed rules that is raising quite a stir among groups ranging from the ACLU to the American Society of Travel Agents. Under the new rules airlines would be required to submit a passenger manifest (including full name, sex, date of birth, and redress number) for all flights departing, arriving, or flying over the United States at least 72 hours prior to departure. Boarding passes will only be issued to those passengers that have been cleared. "Hasbrouck submitted that requiring clearance in order to travel violates the US First Amendment right of assembly, the central claim in John Gilmore's case against the US government over the requirement to show photo ID for domestic travel. [...] ACLU's Barry Steinhardt quoted press reports of 500,000 to 750,000 people on the watch list (of which the no-fly list is a subset). 'If there are that many terrorists in the US, we'd all be dead.' TSA representative Kip Hawley noted that the list has been carefully investigated and halved over the last year. 'Half of grossly bloated is still bloated,' Steinhardt replied."

say goodbuy

[russ1337]

Say goodbye to last minute business travel = say goodbye to important meetings = say goodbye to business dealings = say goodbye to the economy...

Re:say goodbuy

[igjeff]

How about saying goodbye to flying to a funeral.

They're really gonna expect people to get cleared 72 hours in advance to go to their mother's funeral (to pick an example)?

Well, I guess they (TPTB at the TSA) continue to demonstrate how utterly clueless they are.

Re:say goodbuy

[walt-sjc]

Or seeing your father one last time BEFORE he dies.

Yep - totally clueless. And before someone suggests it, I should not have to provide the government a REASON why I want to travel on a moment's notice. We should not have to make exceptions for something so wrong.

Re:say goodbuy

[Anonymous Coward]

Sir,

You should have visited your parents frequently in order to avoid such last minute travel plans. Visiting your loved ones frequently builds stronger families.

Thank you,

TSA Rep

Re:say goodbuy

[GlL]

From the Kent v. Dulles case in 1957, around the McCarthy era, at the Supreme Court, Justice William O. Douglas' wrote for the court:
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values."
If we cannot see the "watch lists", then there is no way for us to challenge our presence on such a list. That in my opinion is taking away someone's right to travel without due process.

Re:

[cyphergirl]

I second your thoughts and will add a snippet that I posted to my blog after returning from a last minute business trip today:

"I had an o-dark-thirty flight home from Orlando this morning. When I got to the Southwest counter, there was no line which was a cool thing. I stepped up to a kiosk, and a guy about my age and with no baggage stepped up to the one next to me. I checked in and was handing my bags over when I heard the guy explaining that his flight doesn't leave until tomorrow morning but he was chec

Re:

[hkfczrqj]

When my mother passed away in January, I had to fly internationally to go to her funeral. You don't know how much shi^H^H^H screening I had to put up with just for paying at the counter, besides myself being emotionally distressed.

72 hrs is just, well... no need to repeat what most /.ers are saying now.

Re:say goodbuy

[griffjon]

First, you can still book on short notice; this 72 hour lead time is just to get the bulk of the clearance out of the way (claim the TSA):

...unless the individual makes a reservation within 72 hours of the scheduled flight departure time, changes a flight within
72 hours of the scheduled flight departure time, or requests to enter a sterile area upon arrival at the airport.

In such cases, TSA would require covered aircraft operators to send the required information to TSA immediately. TSA, in coordination with the TSC where necessary, would compare the passenger and non-traveler information obtained from each covered
aircraft operator to information contained in the watch list.

but they did manage to sneak in additional papers-please wording:

Not issue to an individual a boarding pass or authorization to enter a sterile area or permit an individual to board an aircraft or enter a sterile area if the individual does not provide a verifying identity document when requested under circumstances described above, unless otherwise authorized by TSA.

It's still bad, and hasslesome, and invasive of privacy, but not outright bullet-in-foot material.

Requirement is 30 min before flight

[SuperKendall]

If you read the actual PDF, the requirement is 30 minutes before the flight for the TSA to clear. They just want the airline to send what they have 72 hours before, and require a full name (and only a full name) to make a reservation.

Hardly the ball-buster everyone is making it out to be.

Re:Requirement is 30 min before flight

[dgatwood]

Okay, either A. the TSA really needs three days for clearance because they do hand checking, or B. they do an automated check and don't need that time. Let's examine each case.

If it really takes 72 hours to check someone out thoroughly, then they can't realistically let people be added to flights after that. Otherwise, the terrorists will just book at the last minute and will be checked more quickly and will have a much greater chance of getting missed in the rush.

If it doesn't really take 72 hours to check somebody out, then the TSA is just bullying the airlines into doing extra work, thus raising the cost of travel for everybody with no actual benefit.

I fail to see the upside here.

Re:Requirement is 30 min before flight

[DragonWriter]

I fail to see the upside here.

The upside is it helps break the expectation of freedom and get people used to the idea that every action must be pre-cleared by the government, which reduces the probability of strenuous objection to future intrusive policies.

Admittedly, though, that's only an "upside" from a certain perspective.

Re:Requirement is 30 min before flight

[Firethorn]

How about a 3 day period because they automatically check, which takes only seconds, but having three days allows them to peform the hand checks needed when the automatic check throws a flag?

As they say in the document...

[SuperKendall]

In the PDF, they note that three days provides a good deal of time for them to correct or correlate information from other government agencies. Have *you* ever tried to get anything from even a single government agency in under 30 minutes?

Again, all they are asking is for airlines to send what they can three days before, and then send updates - hardly onerous!

Re:

[falconwolf]

You have to start somewhere, name's as good as anything and better than most. Would you rather they require a full headshot to make a reservation? Or perhaps a blood and stool sample?

Yea, there's a starting point. In the USA it's called the Constitution of the USA, and nowhere in it does it give the government any power to require people hand over their id, for any reason!

Falcon

Re:

[russ1337]

Tell me why in 2007 these "last minute" conferences can't be conducted online? If you tell me the face-to-face neet is essential, why are you going into it with less than three days preparation?

You know anyone that works in real estate or venture capital? Ask them the same question.

Re:

[walt-sjc]

Face to face is preferable because you can read body language. This is VERY important in business deals. In some negotiations, the difference can be in the millions. If you know your job / product / etc., you don't need "days" to prepare - you are ALWAYS prepared.

Maybe when we all have Cisco Telepresence things will be better. But we don't have that now (not to mention that it is VERY expensive.)

Your payperz, plezz

[TrentTheThief]

Back when I was young, the Soviet Union required internal passports... Seems to me that things are rapidly progressing that way here.... Maybe it's time to emigrate to Russia now that they're freer than Americans in America.

Re:Your payperz, plezz

[Anonymous Coward]

It's gonna get posted 50 times, so I might as well get it out of the way. (Posted AC for no karma whoring.)

Capt. Vasili Borodin: I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
Captain Ramius: I suppose.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.

Re:Your payperz, plezz

[Alsee]

You can still drive state-to-state with no papers. You just can't fly.

Answer A: They're working on fixing that too.

Answer B: Aloha.

-

Re:

[Dausha]

"You can still drive state-to-state with no papers."

Actually, you can't. You have to have a valid driver's license to drive.

Re:Your payperz, plezz

[cashman73]

I dunno about that,... has anybody driven between Arizona & California recently. On a recent trip from Phoenix to San Diego, we were stopped on I-8, both ways. Going into California, a CA state officer stopped all traffic and asked what our origin and destination were. Going the other way, a federal border patrol agent stopped all traffic entering Arizona, inquiring the same, but asking more questions, like, "Is everyone in your car a US citizen?" He didn't ask to see a driver's license or other identification, but I suspect this is coming. And this is on a trip from Phoenix, Arizona, to San Diego, California! The Mexican border was close, sure, but it was never crossed!

Border patrol checkpoints

[Sloppy]

I get that on intrastate trips in New Mexico, just driving from Las Cruces to Albuquerque. It has been going on for decades.

Kinda pricey

[name_already_taken]

Which is why I'm wondering why in the post-9/11 environment we don't see more "luxury semi-private-charter" type thingies showing up with smaller planes, where they drive you out to the flight line from your home. No time-wasting trip through airport security. No "arrive at least 3hrs before your flight." In fact, if you're 5 minutes late they'd.. just wait for you.

Have you priced it? I have. $500 for a commercial flight, or $3500 for a charter from the Chicago area to North Carolina. Which do you think

Re:

[Firethorn]

Kinda makes the market for that type of service a little small. Anyone who can afford to spend that much on a flight, already does.

Ever checked out the prices for many first class tickets? How about in situations where you're going from small airport to small airport, requiring connecting flights. A chartered plane, while it might be slower than a commercial jet, has the advantage of more or less direct line travel.

If you're sending more than one person, especially if travel hours are billable, it quickly

Re:

[cashman73]

You must be new here,... the correct response for your statement should have been phrased beginning with, "In Soviet Russia,..."

Re:Your payperz, plezz

[niiler]

Actually, my dad was born in Estonia and lived under both Soviet and Nazi occupations. And one of the things he has always told me was that freedom is a slippery slope. Dictators and tyrants have always used some version of the phrase: "for the greater good" to get what they want. Although you are right in that we are still nowhere close to Stalin's Russia or Hitler's Germany, acceding to this without even questioning the consequences to law-abiding Americans is ridiculous and leads us down the slippery slope.

oh boy

[NiceGeek]

Knowing exactly when and where someone is traveling to with 72 hours notice...naw this will never be abused.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Knowing exactly when and where someone is traveling to with 72 hours notice...naw this will never be abused.


Look at the upside. I would love to have 72 hour notice before my manager sends me somewhere. Hell, I'd settle for 24 hours..

I can see it now!

[Dusty00]

Clerk at Airport: "I'm sorry Mrs. Clinton, there seems to be a mix up, you're not clear to fly, don't worry we can get it fixed and have you on the same flight in three days. What? Oh the presidential debate is tonight? Hmm, well I might be able to get you on tomorrow..."

Re:

[darkonc]

It'll be even better if Ms. Clinton (or whomever runs for the Democrats) gets into power and it's Bush and the current TSA cronies who get their travel plans royally messed up by this proposed rule.

Re:I can see it now!

[jamstar7]

Wasn't Sen. Ted Kennedy on the no-fly list for awhile? IIRC, took him like 6 weeks to get off it...

Makes you wonder how long it'd take Joe Sixpack to get off the list...

Completely impractical?

[jandrese]

I guess last minute flights are out the window then huh? It's not like people don't have emergencies that require them to be across the country by tomorrow. I'm sure the counterargument is that "it does us no good to discover that someone 'suspicious' was on a flight that landed two days ago, he might have been a bomber!", but frankly I don't think the extra security is worth the inconvenience in this case. I know that is a rather cavalier thing to say, but in essence all security measures like this are a tradeoff vs. convenience and I feel this one goes way too far.

Re:

[LWATCDR]

Forget about flying stand by.
What about if your flight is delayed.
I am sorry but you missed your connection. It will take a three days to get you on a new flight. Have a nice day.

Civil Protest Idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

All American citizens who wish to retain their freedom of movement should immediately begin informing their local authorities whenever they travel, no matter the distance or means of transport. Imagine how quickly the police, FBI, CIA, TSA, et cetera will get tired reports filed by self-reporting citizens explaining in detail that they need to go to work, stop by the grocery store, or visit their cousin in Roxbury....

Re:

[dkf]

Naw, the government would love this. It would give them a reason to apply GPS tracking to everybody.

That's just because you're not filing enough detail ("I've decided to travel across the room to adjust the thermostat on the aircon, so I thought I'd better file a full report with the TSA", followed by "Following the successful journey as described in previously mentioned filing XYZ-1230467361-Q, I'll be making a return journey via the plant in the window which needs a bit of water"). And remember, those filings have got to be hand-written (in your best and most cursive style) in red pen on paper. With as

This proposal is DOA.

[CodeShark]

So, if one of us techie types has a client whose information infostructure is downed hard for some reason, my company can no longer just put me on a same day flight to fix it? Or my dad (who is nearly 80) has a heart attack and I need to get there immediately or he dies first...Aside from the Airlines and Travel agents pitching a fit, business interests won't tolerate it, personal interests won't tolerate it - in fact no-one I can think of will tolerate it.

Apparently the TSA has forgotten that this is America and we go where we like when we like and how we like (unless we're in prison, of course) without Uncle Sam knowing where we are. Like the commercial says, " we are free to move about the country."

Missed flights?

[WPIDalamar]

How many people have missed their flight and caught a later one the same day?

Imagine being stuck 3 days before you can go home.

What about funerals/bereavement fares?

[coug_]

My grandfather died a few years ago, and I was on a plane the next day to visit with family. Now, it ended up that he wasn't buried until the following week, but if he had been buried sooner and I had had to wait 3 days prior to flying out, I would've missed his funeral.

Don't worry folks

[jtroutman]

This'll never fly.

Re:Don't worry folks

[Grygus]

Not for 72 hours, anyway.

This is just what Bin Laden wants

[G4from128k]

The TSA seems to be doing all it can to kill the U.S. economy by making travel even more of a nightmare. I know plenty of business travelers that don't know their schedule 72 hours in advance -- they go where ever they are needed when ever they are needed. The more red tape a country throws down at the border, the less business that people will do here.

I'm sure bin Laden is laughing in his cave right now. He's used a classic martial arts move -- using the strength of the opponent against the opponent. Bin Laden wants to the isolate the U.S. from the world and the TSA is doing a great job of that.

Load of fear-mongering crap

[amcdiarmid]

The Government in general, and specifically this administration, seems to want to be Orwellian in what it knows about everyone.

I remember in the 90's when the Secret Service first started closing off traffic near the White House. The easy North/South move on the West side got bogged down from the traffic problems: Penn Ave N of the White House is shut down; E Street S. of the White House is shut down. There is now an area of eight blocks where you can't go West without going North, or South. Under Clinton, the street got opened - for about a week until some bombing far away.

It's not that I object to security. It's just I object to security that pushes attacks onto innocents & away from those who "incited" the attacks in the first place.

I also remember being able to get onto planes without any time consuming security screening. Now we have to wait for everything to be checked forever. The screening does not make us any more secure*, it just takes longer.

Go big propaganda fear-mongering! we didn't need the free time to get to anywhere anyhow. If we did, we'd all be rich enough to have our own planes.

*: The airline screening does not really make us more secure, as there are still ways to get shit on a plane: Metal Detectors test for guns sold in the US, not guns sold outside the US with lower metal content. Or Ceramic guns. Or Knives without metal (say those nice expensive Kyoceria ceramic knives).

If you like: 2/3rds of a passenger planes cargo is other than passengers and their baggage: It's Air Freight packages. Those packages could easily hold a bomb. Or a passenger could check a bomb with a wireless control that can be carried in the cabin.

the only thing that has been done in the name of security that makes planes more secure was making real security doors on the Pilot's compartment.

There was a good reason for this

[rubypossum]

Excellent point. I just wanted to mention that Clinton had three assassination attempts in his first year. To quote the New York Times "Since Mr. Clinton moved to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the White House has come under assault by a small plane that crashed under the President's bedroom last September and a deranged gunman who was recently convicted of trying to assassinate the President a month later when he fired shots that struck the building but did not injure anyone. In December, the mansion was struck

Re:Load of fear-mongering crap

[Sponge Bath]

...Remove in airplane washroom, detonate at your pleasure

It would be funnier to not remove it and when ready for
detonation, tell the passenger next to you: 'pull my finger'.

I'll Defund TSA, if Elected.

[tjstork]

These guys do not deserve to have a budget. If a terrorist tries to take over your plane, you get up and kick his ass. No need for all this fear mongering and travel inconvenience. It's just make work for security contractors that does absolutely nothing. The best guarantee of your safety are your fists, and not someone elses forms.

Send a Message - Don't Fly

[Knight of Shadows]

They can have my privacy when they pry it out of my cold, dead, fingers. It's simple, folks. Don't fly. I know, I know, we all want to line up at the gates to the abattoir like good little government programmed automatons, but this will do nothing but show them we deserve jackboots kicking in our doors. Do the right thing. Just don't buy their crap. Don't fly. When the airlines start losing money out the ass, then maybe they'll see we're not to be made victims due to idiot fundamentalist extremists, or government abuse of power, or to said government's inability to protect anyone. Hit them where it hurts, folks: in the pocketbook. I'm willing to bet that if over 200 million Americans decided not to fly for a few months, you'd see them scramble to change things.

If I ever win the lottery, I guess I'm outta luck

[BenEnglishAtHome]

I've always dreamed of having enough money and spare time to pack a small suitcase, go to the airport, look at the departure boards, figure out what's leaving in the next couple of hours, and buy a first-class ticket to a destination I've never visited before.

What? I have to know three days in advance everywhere I want to go?

Shit.

I guess I'll just have to dream about having enough money to have my own Gulfstream, since once you get to that level of wealth, the rules that apply to the little people are no longer a problem.

Re:

[NewbieProgrammerMan]

You don't need a fargin' Gulfstream...all you need is a little $30-40K Piper Cherokee or Cessna 172 and go fly yerself practically anywhere in the USA you damn well please.

Yeah, for now. I agree that it's a great thing if you can work it into your budget, but how long do you think you'll have that "anywhere you damn well please (except the ADIZ)" freedom? There are people that would really like to restrict it, and AOPA and others won't be able to hold them off forever.

Faster to drive

[devnullkac]

If you can keep up the pace, you can drive by car between any 2 points in the continental US in 72 hours: 60mph * 72h = 4320 miles. If you've got an emergency, you're better off driving, no matter how far.

FUD - can transmit data up to 30 min before flight

[SuperKendall]

From the PDF for the PROPOSED rule changes (not even final yet, still in public comment phase!):

"Additionally, for reservations made within 72 hours of scheduled flight departure time, covered aircraft operators would be required to transmit Secure Flight Passenger Data as soon as possible."

The TSA is just asking airlines to send what they have 72 hours prior to the flight, so they can correct false alarms earlier and do a better job of identifying problems.

RTFPDF.

Sounds good to me.

Mod Parent down - author has too much common sense

[dtolman]

How dare you throw those facts and common sense into our outrage! We live in a fascist society, and our false assumptions and made up facts about this new policy prove it. Now stop bothering us so we can continue to hide in terror from the made up robotic insects that aren't actually watching us.

I REFUSE to be afraid

[RaigetheFury]

I hate laws like these. They promote the current trend of being afraid. That's the whole goal of terrorists. It costs so much more to operate an airline now. Millions upon millions of people fly ever year. You have more of a chance of dying in a car crash than dying in a plane. But you never hear that statistic when you see a "Horrible plane crash!" news line.

I refuse to be afraid of this. I refuse to support any measure that would protect me 1% more if it took away my rights. This does that. I refuse to live my life afraid of dying when it takes me 2 hours to get through airline security when it should take 20minutes max.

I don't travel by plane at all anymore because of this. I go to Canada once per year and now I HAVE to get a passport because of paranoid people.

Stop being afraid, start defending your rights or we're going to end up needing permission to travel between states.

500,000 to 750,000 Terrorists in The US?

[Slashdot Parent]

So let me get this straight. There are 500,000 to 750,000 suspected terrorists in this country, yet we haven't had a major attack since 9/11/2001?

There are 300M people in the US. Are you seriously telling me that at least 1 in 600 is on a terrorist watch list?

Something tells me that getting onto a terrorist watch list involves something other than being a terrorist. Otherwise, this just doesn't make any sense.

Re:500,000 to 750,000 Terrorists in The US?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Lots of people with no business on the watch list ended up on it without clear guidelines for getting yourself removed. Lots of vocal opponents of the Bush administration like Senator Ted Kennedy, a real terrorist name if ever I heard one ;( and Randi Rhodes, the screaming liberal radio host. Of course, if you complain then not only are you a terrorist sympathizer, you must hate freedom too. Reading conservative blogs, you see how funny they seem to think this is.

So it takes 3 days to look a name up in a database

[RichMan]

What sort of computers are the TSA using if it takes 3 days to match a name to a database.

What century are we living in?

1 hour before boarding is reasonable. Allows data entry and organization for response.
Anything more is just a sloppy system.

Get over it. The terrorists have won.

[smooth wombat]

Yeah, yeah, mark me troll. Whatever.

The fact remains that the very thing we keep hearing those 'trrists' hate, freedom, is essentially dead in this country. For all the talk of how we're supposedly spreading freedom to an occupied country, it's just that, talk, since this administration is hell bent on destroying those very same freedoms in this country.

Between this newest revelation to track when people go on flights, requiring a national ID card, listening to our phone conversations without a warrant to preventing people from paying their bills [shns.com] until the source of their money is ok'd, we no longer live in a truly free society.

Oh sure, I can write this without fear of being arrested, but can I go on a flight without being classified as a threat? What does the file the FBI (and at least one other three-letter agency) have on me (and they do) say?

Bin Laden and his cohorts are probably laughing* in their cave at how they've succeeded in their first goal of undermining our society. How many times a week do we hear about law enforcement going into apoplectic seizures when someone thinks they saw some shifty character hanging around somewhere or an innocent package left behind shuts down some place?

It's a sad state of affairs when the people of this country don't care that their right to be free has been taken away from them. After all, there's those un-reality shows to watch. That the people who only a decade or so ago were crowing about how America is the greatest country on the planet, with all kinds of freedoms not enjoyed by many other countries, are now so willing to go along with this administration's excuses about why the rights enshrined in the Constitution must be taken away to protect them.

The quote about give them an inch and they'll take a mile certainly applies to this administration. Even worse, whoever comes into power next won't have the balls to undo the vast majority of wrongs being perpetrated against society but will instead be more concerned about getting re-elected than serving the people.

The rights of the Constitution had a good run of what, over two hundred years? Not bad all things considered. Now though, we are moving into a new era which will require citizens to involuntarily give up rights which have existed since the founding of the country in an effort to defeat terrorism. It will be a long, never-ending battle but by giving up our rights and acquiescing to the newest form a facist police-like-state, we can be assured that we will be safe and secure in our wiretapped, surveillanced, dwellings.

* I'm assuming that like most leaders, the rules they want to impose on others does not apply to them

This could be great news for Rail Travel

[netsavior]

The US is still in the 19th century as far as rail travel goes compared to the rest of the world. Maybe this will help us realize that there are other options.

It's not just Americans...

[dottyslashdottydot]

This was all over the Canadian news [www.ctv.ca] last night, as they also want the passenger lists of any flights merely flying over American airspace, for example, Montreal to Mexico City. They were originally going to have this rule apply to domestic flights that happen to cross American airspace (which is common with a flight like Toronto to Vancouver), but have thankfully backed down. Oh yeah, and people now have 10 days to comment about these new rules.

balance

[drDugan]

On a long enough time scale, most everything balances out.

The premise of the libertarian movement is small governement. There is a reason that a candidate like Ron Paul is getting so much press and support now - the actions of the government are becoming onerous and encroaching on basic human freedoms.

What the world needs now is a large group of people to collectively tell the state (Read: US FEDERAL GOVERENMNET) to "Back the fuck off" and stay where they belong: defending the country against known threats, domestic and international and creating real domesitc security (not this fake, fear mongering/engineered solution cycle).

"Watch lists" are part of LAZY POLICE WORK. If there is a person that is planning something - investigate them, charge them, arest them. Follow the laws we have now. All the rest of this crap in the name of security is just plain ineffective, lazy behavior driven by the need to cover their asses and assauge their fears that they will be accountable if any thing happens.

The reality is that there is no way to stop terrorism, and people have to get OK with that. If some sicko wants to kill a bunch of people, he or she will. If some sicko wants to fill a truck with fertilizer and gas, and drive into a building, they will. Tough shit. Somebody should have listened to their pleas for help long ago. Living is a world that makes it impossible for someone to bring down a plane is not a world that I want to live in, becuase it means draconian crontrols on freedoms. Those same freedoms we fought for and won hundreds of years ago, and many have died defending. I'd much rather we build a world where people DON'T WANT TO BRING DOWN PLANES. That is completely possible, and if we spent our energies there instead of the current track, we would all have happier, healthier lives.

The debate is not "should we have watch lists or not". The debate is, "who came up with this ridiculous crap and how soon can we remove them from power?"

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[ChronosWS]

Don't *even* suggest this. If you have gotten to this point in your thinking, move to China because that's where stuff like this is supposed to happen, not here.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[crankyspice]

Or even just unexpected commercial trips; I recently flew to Las Vegas in a rented Cessna that didn't pass pre-flight when I went to take off (bad magnetos). I left the bird with the local FBO mechanic and got a ride to McCarran (I was at Henderson), booking a Southwest flight back to L.A. from my Treo during the drive over, as I had to be back in L.A. later that day for an important meeting.

Shit like this will cripple America...

Too bad for derieved relatives

[einhverfr]

When my father-in-law passed away, we had to take a flight the day after we heard the news. My wife is from Indonesia, and it was about a 30-hour plane trip to get there. Adding 72 hours to this would simply be unacceptable as it would likely have caused us to miss the funeral (in Indonesia, it is custom to have an open casket memorial lasting for up to 3-4 days and then bury the body-- this starts almost immediately after the body has been embalmed).

Seems like time to write to Congress.

Re:

[Drathos]

Congressmen fly too.

Congresscritters will just get the Air Force to fly them around. Hell, that's one of the primary missions of the 89th Airlift Wing (first and foremost being to fly the President around).

Re:

[rtb61]

It is not the people who are passengers of airlines that will kill the professionally paranoid power grab, it is people who invest in airlines. No standbyes to fill empty seat, cancelled flights can't be rebooked for 72 hours (free accommodation for three days), not to mention all the cancelled last minute flights.

The cost of this would likely be in the hundreds of millions to the airlines. A completely out of control politically motivated TSA, you must be afraid of terrorist all of the time, see all the

I hate to throw a brink in the arguement...

[Samalie]

...but the document linked in TFA states clearly that airlines have to provide said data to the TSA 72 hours before departure for all confirmed passengers they have...this doesn't mean that you can't book a ticket under 72 hours, or get on that plane. They realized that 90% or so of passengers are booked over 72 hours to departure, and that way they can clean up the last-minute fliers faster.

That being said, its still bullshit, without a doubt. But its NOT going to stop last-minute fliers from being able to fly.

And again, its not that this isn't complete horseshit, but they're already passing your infromation to the TSA - they're just doing it within 15 minutes of departure now (or 15 minutes after departure for international flights).

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Hmm- I failed to read it like that. This makes more sense. If it had been the other way, I'd have had to ask, what about the standby market?

Re:I hate to throw a brink in the arguement...

[pluther]

...what about the standby market?

You think anybody in Congress has ever flown standby?

Or even knows what it is?

forget about back in the day...

[WebCowboy]

At my job we aren't so young and most have families and we still have to make last-minute flights from time to time. On more than one occasion this year I've had to book flights within 72 hours of departure.

I can tell you that in many business cases there is absolutely NO WAY that this proposal is workable. People MUST be able to make travel plans up to and including the day of departure. 3 days is just not workable and the business community simply would not tolerate implementation of this proposal.

There are also far to many last-minute trips made on compassionate grounds. What about flights arranged to see dying loved ones, or to transport donor organs, or to get special treatment at a distant hospital? Hell, you can get a passport faster than 72 hours under normal cases for such reasons. If your identity can be verified well enough to get a passport that quickly then clearing you for a flight should be much easier than that.

Three days? That'll never fly. MAYBE three HOURS, but not three days.

It goes beyond that though--the same proposal not only wants lists for all flights arriving or departing US locations, it wants flight lists for ALMOST EVERY FLIGHT THAT PASSED OVER US AIRSPACE as well...which means they'd like the government to demand passenger lists from Canadian and Mexican airlines for many of their flights that never touch American soil. Not enough to violate their own civil liberties--in the name of safety everyone's liberties must be unduly curtailed.

Re:

[Dzimas]

TFA seems to be a slashdot reading comprehension test. Sadly, you fail. The TSA is not requiring you to book a flight more than 72 hours prior to departure, nor does anyone with half a brain think that would be a clever idea. They are simply proposing that airlines must provide certain information about confirmed passengers 72 hours prior to the flight. They expect that 90 to 93% of travel reservations will be finalized by that point. The other 7-10% are last minute flights or reschedules that will have to

Re:

[achbed]

And in that frame of mind, what's to keep any potential terrorists from buying tickets at the counter? Or on the phone from the lobby the same day as the flight? Or on a laptop? Nothing. In fact, they totally bypass this "Screening" technique, making it worthless. So drop the "security theatre" already, and start doing stuff that might actually work! Damn bureaucrats...

3 days or 3 hours

[falconwolf]

Three days? That'll never fly. MAYBE three HOURS, but not three days.

Forget that. Three minutes is 3 minutes too much. If I want to I should be able to to drive to the airport, pick a flight going where I want and buy a ticket with cash then and there without any "Papers please"!

Falcon

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[Marxist Hacker 42]

We may have to get to that point to satisfy the paranoids who would have me kicked off an airline if I forget to shave.

Re:

[moderatorrater]

If you're real name is anything like your screen name, you're lucky if they ever let you fly again.

You probably don't need to leave your basement

[Chuck Chunder]

But it'd make a pretty sad life.

It's a pretty interesting world out there. Whether experiencing one of the many wonderous things man has achieved or being within a meter or two of a herd of wild elephants while they bath and play in a watering hole there's an awful lot of great things to experience in the world.

You don't need to do it. But it's a bit of a pointless life if you are contented by mere survival.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[dgatwood]

With apologies in advance to Jonathan Swift [art-bin.com], I think this is a great idea. But I'd go one step further. One could just as easily have driven a Ryder truck filled with explosives and put it under the World Trade Center. In fact, terrorists tried that once, and it almost worked. I feel strongly that we should be required to have a 72 hour screening period before renting a vehicle. Of course, if your car breaks down and you need a rental, you should have joined the "trusted driver" program ahead of time. We should also require such a screening before you can buy a car. After all, terrorists spent thousands of dollars on explosives for that truck, so what's another few thousand to buy or lease a car? I think you can see how important it is that only trusted patriotic Americans be allowed to purchase an automobile.

Further, automobiles only provide the casing for the bomb. We should have similar levels of trust for people purchasing bomb-making supplies. For example, we should require a minimum of a 7 day waiting period and appropriate security screening prior to purchasing fertilizer, as you can easily use that to make a bomb. Don't forget gasoline, either. We need at least a 72 hour screening period before you can fill up at the pump. People who need to fill up quickly should trade their privacy rights as part of our "trusted gas purchaser" program.

But that's not the biggest problem we face. The fundamental truth is that terrorists are people. None of these problems would exist if people prone to terrorist actions were not allowed to be born. For this reason, I would like to recommend a mandatory DNA screening prior to giving birth to children. Any children with terroristic tendencies should not be allowed to be carried to term. As an added bonus, these aborted fetuses can be used for scientific research, and in some cases, can be repurposed as a healthy food source for our nation's underprivileged.

I hope by this point you realize that this entire post is satire. My purpose in writing it is to show just how silly the argument of prescreening for aircraft flights in the name of national security really is. While I can't see the U.S. government actually going so far as suggesting that we eat babies to protect against terrorism, we are rapidly approaching that level of absurdity in our national security policy. I think it is time that we all take a step back, breathe, then laugh out loud at these policies at every possible opportunity. Only through laughter can we adequately portray the current administration and its policies as the laughingstock that they are.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[CyberLord Seven]

Sir, I realise that your post was in jest; however, I would like suggest an easy alternative.

We should just mark all patriotic Am3rican$ with a simple mark. Something simple like...oh, I dunno', maybe a six, three score, and six.

Without this mark, no one would be allowed to travel. Besides curtailing the nefarious schemes of terrorists it would also help with the large immigration problem. In time, as the populace surrendered to the most excellent goals of this process, it could easily be extended to other activities such as the buying and selling of goods.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Not a bad idea. We can probably make major inroads in the struggle for universal health care and other government-managed social safety net products in parallel with this enhanced emphasis on security.
More seriously, what about Priceline, CheapTickets, etc., whose business model is predicated upon people being able to do spontaneous things?
Is TSA going to tell you that, sorry, you can't see your dying mother because you moved too far to drive and she didn't give sufficient notice about her sudden illness

What useability - in fact, what security?

[j_w_d]

What I am curious about is this: how many legitimate security threats have been stopped by the regulations in place now? We know they go after nursing mothers, girls with techno-trash style sense, sick people with serious, life threatening conditions, etc. I've also seen them stop people with jars of maple syrup, pickles and other substances, and once even an idiot muling drugs from Canada to Chicago. But, again, how many REAL terrorist style bad guys have we heard about them taking down? By my count, admittedly incomplete though it is, the number is very close to if not actually equal to zero. Then there are those really silly things like the "no-fly" lists. They check your name!! How many real bad guys are going to use their real names? I can just see it, "Name, please? Hmm? Oh, I'm Carlos the Jackal. Sorry, sir, could you step over here? You are on our no-fly list." Seriously, now.

Re:

[big_paul76]

Here, here.

If this sort of thing is so good at screening out 'bad people' or 'terrorist attackers', where are all the genuine terrorists they've caught?

Surely to god if they caught someone, they'd shout it from the rooftops. The fact that NO ONE has been announced suggests that NO ONE has been caught.

Never mind the fact that this type of 'pre-screening' measure only works if you assume that the average garden-variety terrorist isn't smart enough to come up with a fake ID.

When I was in high school, some frie

Re:What useability - in fact, what security?

[ScrewMaster]

No, what he's asking for is some accountability. Hell, maybe all this security theater is doing a great job keeping us safe ... but the way the Feds are handling matters we'll never know. More to the point, if there were any notable successes (and I'm talking real terrorists, now) I would think they'd trot them out to help justify the billions they're spending and the civil liberties they're taking. But they're not, which indicates that a. they've accomplished nothing and wasted all that money or b. they just don't care what we think anymore, or c. all of the above.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[moderatorrater]

maybe a six, three score, and six.

Sorry, we're already using that number for something else. Perhaps you could mark them with a six, three score and seven?

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[Phylarr]

And here are some numbers that I find also help to put the whole terrorism thing in perspective:

Deaths in the U.S. in 2001 due to
heart disease - 700,000
cancer - 553,800
stroke - 164,000
accidents - 102,000 (Car accidents - 42,000)
influenza - 36,000
terrorism - 3,000

Where is the war on cancer, or the war on drunk driving? You're more likely to die driving to the airport than on the plane.

Re:

[BSAtHome]

Your numbers actually pale in the light that given US population, lets say 380M, will require a steady death toll of about 5M per year to keep the population at the same level with an average age of 75 years. Coming to 69% of all death are caused by old age and 0.06% of the death are due to terrorism.

So, the major thing that needs to be forbidden is to die of old age, since that seems to be the cause of 2/3rds of all problems. Maybe everybody needs to be screened to prevent them from aging? Or maybe everybo

If you must die do so quietly so as not to disturb

[HTH NE1]

Deaths in the U.S. in 2001 due to heart disease - 700,000; cancer - 553,800; stroke - 164,000; accidents - 102,000 (Car accidents - 42,000); influenza - 36,000; terrorism - 3,000.

Where is the war on cancer, or the war on drunk driving? You're more likely to die driving to the airport than on the plane.

The difference is when you die in an act of terrorism, it's more likely to be televised and thus breed dissatisfaction among the survivors with the coincident administration of government for failing to prevent it. People who die quietly (relatively speaking) don't provoke as much outrage.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[westlake]

And here are some numbers that I find also help to put the whole terrorism thing in perspective

The fallacy in your argument is that deaths from heart disease are not concentrated in a single time and place. No one community has bear the burden of 700,000 deaths in 102 minutes.

Heart disease, cancer, stroke, etc., can be more or less defined as diseases associated with aging and old age.

These deaths consequently rarely comes as a complete surprise - and the shock can be absorbed through mechanisms that have evolved over thousands of years.

But, as a society, we have often failed miserably in managing the single incident - the defining moment - that erodes confidence in the government and other social institutions, is marked by massive loss of life, property damage, economic losses that ripple through the entire economy - the WTC and Katrina continue to cast a very long shadow.

Re:

[adminstring]

Heart disease, cancer, and stroke are better defined as diseases associated with lifestyle choices and environment. For example, heart disease and stroke are very strongly linked to smoking, a lack of exercise, and a high-cholesterol diet. And while it may take a while for these factors to catch up with you, they aren't exactly "caused" by old age.

These causes of death are risks which can be easily reduced by changing our everyday behavior. A healthy diet, fresh air, and exercise will dramatically reduc

Re:

[GPL Apostate]

as a society, we have often failed miserably in managing the factors which really cause death and suffering: diet, exercise, and environmental quality.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a country that 'manages my diet.' Similarly, I don't want to live in a country that 'manages my exercise.'

I could see there being some social movement to encourage a better diet and more exercise, but I am not keen on government being the mechanism to 'manage' either of these.

I suppose in the future, when w

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[PMBjornerud]

Where did you get your hand on such propaganda?!? Come with us, please.

Why the hell are you trying to make excuses for the terrorists? You're no true patriot. We can only hope that in a few years, spreading misinformation like this will be outlawed. ...

When I was a kid, 20 years ago, my world view was that the only country in the world where people would be stopped because of their papers and turned back with no reason, - was the Sovjet Union and its vassal states.

Submit my name 3 days before travel and maybe be refused on short notice? Sovjet. Hearing stories about small issues in immigration escalating and you ending up being sent back? Sovjet.

You're still a good country. Please don't become a bad one...

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[vtcodger]

***I feel strongly that we should be required to have a 72 hour screening period before renting a vehicle.***

And we should back that up with a 72 hour waiting period before stealing a vehicle that could be used to transport a bomb.

We can beat this terrorism thing if we just pull together.

(Maybe if we keep this up, the terrorists will find our antics so entertaining that they will decide to keep us around for a while).

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[Pig Hogger]

Why bother? Just fly naked. No need for hand-baggage, being naked will be the in-flight entertainment...

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Have you seen the average american?

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[dgatwood]

Hence the entertainment value (watching the women scream in horror as the Slashdotters walk on).

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy

[dgatwood]

The 1993 attack did significant damage and exposed the many - many - problems in combating a high-rise fire, but it did not threaten the structural integrity of the building.

Only because they didn't place it very well.

To quote from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3069653/ [msn.com]: On February 26, 1993, the World Trade Center merely shook but did not collapse. But it was a close call. Later, the WTC's architect would tell jurors that if the van had been left closer to the poured concrete foundations, they would have succeeded. The tower would have fallen.

Re:This is ridiculous and scary..

[baffled]

Yeah. Great. Are any of the candidates proposing to abolish the fucking TSA.

Yes. Ron Paul. No joke. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5ZXM3h4jig [youtube.com] 1min 10secs in. The airlines should be in charge of airline security, not the government.

Re:

[Taeolas]

Canadian Travel and Airline groups are pissed about those proposals too ( http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2007/10/12/airtravel-us.html [www.cbc.ca] ). Notice that the regulations also specify flights "Flying Over" US Airspace? So flights from Toronto to Cuba (or any other southern non-US destination) would also fall under those criteria. Guess Halifax and Moncton Airports better get cracking on expanding their capacity; all those Southern flights may have to fly from the Maritimes to keep out of US airspace. (That or

Re:Sensationalist Headline

[walt-sjc]

The government has a habit of proposing something and then implementing it. They very rarely make proposals without intending to implement it.

The point is that now is the time for feedback. You can't give feedback on something you don't know about.

Say, you don't work for the government do you? Sure don't want those pesky private citizens allowed to influence potential new regulations or laws that affect them, right? I mean the NERVE of some people - thinking that the government works for the citizens...

Re:

[HarvardAce]

love how the slashdot headline screams this like it has already taken affect.

In fact, its a set of proposed rules that hasn't even come close to be implemented yet.

Not only that, but if you read the underlying rules [regulations.gov], it states that the airlines only need to send what they have 72 hours in advance. Airlines are supposed to then send updates as the passenger manifest changes during the 72 hours immediately preceding flight. The idea is that they want to be able to work on the manifest in advance as much as possible. This really isn't a big deal, and if anything, would help to remove false positives since you'll likely have 3 days to work out any issues as opposed to

Re:

[bzelbob]

Though I agree that the headline is somewhat sensationalist, I think we all have to keep in mind that the root of the problem lies in the fact that TSA is trying to make a stupid process more efficient. (Instead of say... eliminating the stupidity altogether.)

Let's review some basic ideas:

1) Knowing who people are doesn't (by itself) prevent terrorism at all.
2) Even if it could, IDs could still be forged.
3) Even if IDs couldn't be easily forged, this would still be a violation of the rights of Amer

Re:Attention America ...

[Tackhead]

> Attention America ...
>
>Go fuck yourselves.
>
>Sincerely, the rest of the world.

Attention, rest of the world.

As you can plainly see by this article, we're doing precisely that.

Re:Let's do the same in Europe

[0111 1110]

You are forgetting that we have to arrive in our own country too. Do you think we are treated that much better? The people that are hired for these jobs are trained to treat everyone like a suspect in a crime and most of them have the mindset of thugs. I don't think you want to turn your immigration procedures into the kind of Police State welcome that we receive whenever returning home. The U.S. is by far the worst country in the world in this respect. The Founding Fathers would be rolling in their graves if they could see it. We used to be about welcoming people from other lands. Now we are about lining them up against a wall, strip searching them, interrogating them, intimidating them, harassing them so much that they would never even think of returning to this strange land where everyone is a suspected terrorist until proven otherwise. We *are* becoming a police state and are already being recognized as such by many foreigners who can laugh at how "free" we are. I might laugh with them, but it is just sad.