Feds considering easing air travel restrictions?

B

blackmind

Moderator
Feds may ease airline security measures


The new head of the Transportation Security Administration has called for a broad review of the nation's air security system to update the agency's approach to threats and reduce checkpoint hassles for passengers.

Edmund S. "Kip" Hawley, an assistant secretary of homeland security, directed his staff to propose changes in how the agency screens 2 million passengers a day. The staff's first set of recommendations, detailed in an Aug. 5 document, includes proposals to lift the ban on various carry-on items such as scissors, razor blades and knives less than five inches long. It also proposes that passengers no longer routinely be required to remove their shoes at security checkpoints.
Click to expand...


WOW.

For those of you who, like me, feel naked when forced to travel without at least a small folding knife at the ready, this is huge news.

Maybe they've finally realized that NEVER AGAIN will air travelers allow someone to take control of an airplane and cause it to crash just because he had a knife. Better to get cut stopping him, than say, "Oh, gee, he has a knife, we'd better let him have control of the plane." 'Cause we know where that gets us.

Here's hoping they see this through.

And I wouldn't mind not having to take my Kubotan off my keychain, either.

-blackmind
 
If I was on a plane that was being hijacked, and I was able to carry a knife. You can bet that they would never succeed in their plans.

I think they are finally starting to wise up :eek: .

Much like how one of the planes in 9/11 never reached its target..... when the people know what is going on they will do what is necessary to stop it..... we just have to give them the tools for the job.
 
As someone who flies all the time and has had to throw away 2 swiss army knifes ... plus 1 for they're finally getting smart.

The no knives rule accomplishes nothing. I wouldn't be suprised if they find a way to stop lock back knives ... but already they're talking about knives with less than 3" blades so no big deal in any case.
 
Seriously, I think if someone has a CCP they SHOULD allow something like a small knife, etc. If you've been cleared to carry a concealed handgun in public, it's a pretty fair bet you're responsible enough to be trusted with a 3" folder on your belt.

I fly a LOT, and it's nice to see the possibility of a few brains starting to poke through all the BS.
 
Geez, has it been seven years already?

Kip is one of the nicer guys you'll meet in life. I worked with him when he was CEO of Skyway and he went out to the range with my boss and I during a lunchtime .22 plinking session. Also it was a way of introducing him to the "Zen" of shooting as a way of relaxing during an otherwise busy day.

Here's the DHS link announcing his swearing in..
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=11&content=4714
 
Excellent! The peons can have back their nail clippers and small pocket knives so that they don't complain when their masters are exempt from screening:
It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.
Click to expand...
Oh, yeah, if you are flying to/from Washington, you don't have to stay in your seat the last/first 30 minutes of the flight. That's a real relief (literally) from a totally stupid rule.
 
Actually the rule against leaving your seat at the beginning and end of the flight is a pragmatic one.

An aircraft is less stable at lower speeds during take-offs and landings. If you permit people to wander about it can change the center of gravity (CG) enough that you lose the aircraft into a smoking black hole. Once the aircraft is flying at speed and above about 15,000 ft, you should be able to walk about the cabin. Just be prepared for "lumpy air" conditions around some areas.
 
Sorry, but I did not mean the rational requirement to be seated during actual takeoffs and landings, which applies to all flights, but to the idiotic 30-minute rule that only applied to flights departing from or arriving at Washington Reagan.
 
You mean my Swiss Army knife can be on my person. What about the effusion of blood they were worried about when the ban first came into effect?

Before the ban, I traveled with a tool bag that contained a nice, sharp compass (and dividers), chisels, hammers, gouges, files, sharpening stones. Guess what, the plane landed without incident and we all went on our way. Gee, I wonder what I wasn't possessed by the demons to chisel my way to the fuel tank. :rolleyes:
 
Excellent! The peons can have back their nail clippers and small pocket knives so that they don't complain when their masters are exempt from screening:

It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with that in principle. Honestly, all the people on that list have had their backgrounds thoroughly checked or are well known, public people. An additional check at the airport isn't going to accomplish anything but longer lines.

Chris
 
An aircraft is less stable at lower speeds during take-offs and landings. If you permit people to wander about it can change the center of gravity (CG) enough that you lose the aircraft into a smoking black hole. Once the aircraft is flying at speed and above about 15,000 ft, you should be able to walk about the cabin. Just be prepared for "lumpy air" conditions around some areas.
Click to expand...

I hope you don't seriously believe that the difference between stable flight during takeoff or landing and an unrecoverable stall is made by a few people getting up and walking to the bathroom (well within the CG envelope of a modern airliner, I'm sure). Not when the plane itself weighs many tons, and we're not talking about a mad stampede of scores of people toward the nose or tail of the aircraft.

I disagree with your statement that "an aircraft is less stable at lower speeds during takeoffs and landings." Aircraft are either stable or they are not. They are closer to stall speed during takeoff or landing, and control surface response is not as crisp since it depends on deflection of air, but that doesn't translate to "less stable," and it certainly is a different issue from the movement of the CG by a few lavatory users at most. And anyway, passengers have to be seatbelted during takeoff and landing per FAR, so that's a moot point.

-blackmind
 
I don't have a problem with that in principle. Honestly, all the people on that list have had their backgrounds thoroughly checked or are well known, public people. An additional check at the airport isn't going to accomplish anything but longer lines.
Click to expand...
It is precisely on principle that I do object to the elite being exempt from airport screening. If Ted Kennedy didn't show up on the no-fly list, or Al Gore didn't get randomly selected for hand screening, the elite would not even notice, and certainly not care, about the ludicrous nature of so many aspects of the airport security process. Maybe if the elite have to suffer through the same process as everyone else, they will have some incentive to make the process more rational for everyone.
 
mtnbkr
I don't have a problem with that in principle. Honestly, all the people on that list have had their backgrounds thoroughly checked or are well known, public people. An additional check at the airport isn't going to accomplish anything but longer lines.
Click to expand...
The "principle" does not stop there. How would you like to be subject to "more questioning", perhaps additional searches, and a much longer wait simply because you can not afford the yearly cost of the "verified traveller" type cards issued by a private corporation? Like the Clear card" by Verified Identity Pass Inc.

How about when things are heated up some more and it is not just air travel that the privileged and the wealthy get to breeze on through? Like freeway checkpoints, ship, train and bus travel?

Think about it. How many of these people with their so-called "thoroughly checked backgrounds" are any more to be trusted than you or me?

See:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172683
 
mtnbkr said:
I don't have a problem with that in principle. Honestly, all the people on that list have had their backgrounds thoroughly checked or are well known, public people.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all certain that CongressCritters are subject to mandatory background checks. http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0318/news-howland.php
"He is astounded that the federal government would require a public official who has been thoroughly vetted by the electoral process to undergo an investigation before receiving important briefings."

This exact same statement could be used to support exemptions for elected officials of all manner of law: from gun ownership and carry laws to sobriety checkpoints.

If The People can't be trusted, NONE of The People should be trusted. It serves as a fair check to abuse.
Rich
 
Re: Aircraft stability
Blackmind, your point is well taken - I had been thinking of smaller "commuter" aircraft instead of a 767. I won't argue the issue of a few people moving about making a difference --except to say that every so often the supercargos make an error and unbalance an aircraft by misloading freight. Having had the fun of being on one flight where this occurred and the craft was tail-heavy is not something I want to repeat.

Rich said...
"He is astounded that the federal government would require a public official who has been thoroughly vetted by the electoral process to undergo an investigation before receiving important briefings."
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure how thoroughly that vetting process works. I can think of a number of those folks I wouldn't trust with a hot stove. I'm sure you can too.
 
Rich Lucibella
I'm not at all certain that CongressCritters are subject to mandatory background checks [etc]
Click to expand...
And we do know that there have been a number of very highly placed persons in and around government - whether elected or appointed - that are "convicted felons". Like Poindexter.

Look at the ones who evidently seem to have a great deal to hide judging from some of their activities. Like Sandy Berger.
 
A line for the bathroom that's 10 people deep means that's probably 2000 pounds that got moved from an even distribution to right at the very tail of the aircraft.

People are heavier than you think :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top