Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

[evildave]

http://www.trivalleyherald.com/Stories/0,1413,86~10669~1887790,00.html
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61891,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4

So, we have this program they want to do: investigate and rate everyone before they can ride on a commercial airliner.

You are green: As normal.

You are yellow: You get extra checks every time you try to board a plane.

You are orange: You get an anal exam every time you try to board a plane.

You are red: you can never fly at all.

Officials designing CAPPS II hope the new system will flag only 5 percent of domestic airline passengers for closer scrutiny.

An estimated 1-2 percent who get "red" coding will be barred from boarding and face police questioning. They may be arrested.

Ahh, great. So, all you need is a bit set in the database, and you can never, ever travel by air. If you don't like it, be arrested. I can see great potential in monkeying with people's records to get them into the "orange" or "red" categories. Officially and unofficially. There's probably no way to appeal the status.

Naturally, someone who has a nice, secure clean, green status with lots of airline miles and is THEN recruited by terrorists can expect only trivial (pre-2001) airport security measures to apply to them. After all, they're already "clear".

Just another excuse to start investigating everybody while we build a police state that would make the worst of Orwellian predictions seem optimistic and upbeat.

 

[Jocko]

http://www.trivalleyherald.com/Stories/0,1413,86~10669~1887790,00.html
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61891,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4

So, we have this program they want to do: investigate and rate everyone before they can ride on a commercial airliner.

You are green: As normal.

You are yellow: You get extra checks every time you try to board a plane.

You are orange: You get an anal exam every time you try to board a plane.

You are red: you can never fly at all.





Ahh, great. So, all you need is a bit set in the database, and you can never, ever travel by air. If you don't like it, be arrested. I can see great potential in monkeying with people's records to get them into the "orange" or "red" categories. Officially and unofficially. There's probably no way to appeal the status.

Naturally, someone who has a nice, secure clean, green status with lots of airline miles and is THEN recruited by terrorists can expect only trivial (pre-2001) airport security measures to apply to them. After all, they're already "clear".

Just another excuse to start investigating everybody while we build a police state that would make the worst of Orwellian predictions seem optimistic and upbeat.

Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Show me your constitutional right to not take Amtrak or Greyhound. How is this an infringement on "rights" as defined by the constitution, and not as defined by 21st century ACLU standards? Honestly, if you're saying this is an abridgement of rights, please define which rights.

If it's nothing more than an abrdigement of convenience, as I'm sure you'll find, then please refer to the "boo hoo" at the beginning of this thread.

 

[fishbob]

Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Show me your constitutional right to not take Amtrak or Greyhound.

You can't get there from here by Amtrak or Greyhound.

"An abridgement of convenience" was one of the terrorist successes. In the US, time is money, and the government's abridgements of convenience have cost the US bazillions of dollars so far. Plus people are more gripey and whiney and boo-hooey than before - another win for the terrorists.

 

[Cecil]

Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

If it's nothing more than an abrdigement of convenience, as I'm sure you'll find, then please refer to the "boo hoo" at the beginning of this thread.

I'm sure you'll be just as nonchalant when you become "red" due to a bureaucratic mistake and can't fly anymore.

 

[Craig]

Re: Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

I'm sure you'll be just as nonchalant when you become "red" due to a bureaucratic mistake and can't fly anymore.

I would be more concerned if I became "orange", to be honest.

 

[The Don]

Of course large-scale government data integration projects never, ever, ever have any data quality problems or teething troubles.

btw. at 5% of 163 million passengers, that implies that there will be about 8 million arrests a year under this scheme.

Does the U.S. have a large enough law enforcement function to cope ?

Also, as a terrorist, if my round trip ticket is bought on a business account am I in the clear ?

 

[Martin]

Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Show me your constitutional right to not take Amtrak or Greyhound

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 

[pgwenthold]

Whenever I see a proposal of new security measures, the first thing I wonder is, would it have stopped what happened on 9/11?

Restrictions against bringing sharp objects on board? Might have slowed them down, yep.

Not allowing parking near the terminal? No curbside check-in? Wouldn't have phased thim in the least.

How many of the 9/11 hijackers would have been affected by this program?

 

[rikzilla]

You can't get there from here by Amtrak or Greyhound.

"An abridgement of convenience" was one of the terrorist successes. In the US, time is money, and the government's abridgements of convenience have cost the US bazillions of dollars so far. Plus people are more gripey and whiney and boo-hooey than before - another win for the terrorists.

You forgot to mention the ANSWER protesters in DC. I was stuck in traffic because of their antics one day....score another win for the terrorists.

-z

 

[rikzilla]

Whenever I see a proposal of new security measures, the first thing I wonder is, would it have stopped what happened on 9/11?

Restrictions against bringing sharp objects on board? Might have slowed them down, yep.

Not allowing parking near the terminal? No curbside check-in? Wouldn't have phased thim in the least.

How many of the 9/11 hijackers would have been affected by this program?

You forgot:

Locked and hardened cockpit doors. Would the 9/11 hijackers been affected? Yes.

Armed pilots. Armed pilot vs box-cutter weilding nut jobs? Win goes to the armed pilot, as long as he shoots straight. Another "Yes".

Sky marshalls on flights. See above.

There are many barriers, some small, some not so small. The trick for the prospective hijacker is to defeat them all. I don't care for his chances of success, post 9/11.

-z

 

[Aoidoi]

btw. at 5% of 163 million passengers, that implies that there will be about 8 million arrests a year under this scheme.

From the article:

Officials designing CAPPS II hope the new system will flag only 5 percent of domestic airline passengers for closer scrutiny.

Domestic airlines carried 612 million passengers in 2003, according to the Census Bureau; the current system flagged 15 percent of them, according to Hatfield.

The five percent is not for arrests but for additional "scrutiny," and apparently is a reduction by 2/3 over the current system. Some percentage of that 5% is marked as "red" and 1-2% of those may be arrested. So at an absolute max it would be .01% of people being arrested, and almost certainly more like .0001%. And really, if they start catching people for outstanding warrants and such is that really a bad thing?

Yes, there will be screwups. But given that there is apparently already a system in place why not try to improve it?

 

[Tmy]

Dont you have the right to sorta go where you want. Assocation I guess? The govt just cant force you to stay in one place.

Id be kinda strange to had red card status and NOT be in jail? How woudl that happen. Is there some sort of due process to get that changed.?

 

[shanek]

You are green: As normal.

"Normal" meaning what? Right now, "normal" means being stripped of your shoes and being molested with a metal-detecting wand while some government flunkie rummages through your personal effects. That really makes me frightened to think of that the "extra checks" might be!

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

Boo hoo. Cry me a river. Show me your constitutional right to not take Amtrak or Greyhound.

9th Amendment. Plus, there's NOTHING WHATSOEVER in the Constitution giving the Federal government this power, so it is unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment as well.

 

[Richard G]

2nd Amendment says "right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

The Federal Goverment (FAA) has passed laws that expressly forbid people from bearing arms on airplanes. That is a violation of everyones rights.

Without this unconstitutional restriction, airlines would still be free (under private property rights) to restrict firearms on their flights. They are not free to do this however, as the Federal Goverment mandates it.

Fly on a plane, or enter an airport terminal, and you magicly lose all your rights at the door. . I will never fly again.

 

[Suddenly]

You forgot to mention the ANSWER protesters in DC. I was stuck in traffic because of their antics one day....score another win for the terrorists.

-z

That reminds me. The weekend the war started I was, like a good American, supporting the tourism industry by going to Atlantic City to play poker. On the way home, my buddy and I were listening to the news reports of protesters blocking steets in large cities.

I hate traffic. Hate it. Large reason why I live in the sticks.

As we entered Philadelphia, I told him that if we got stuck by those goons I was going to either run someone over or at least try my best to pick a fight with the marchers.

"Where did you get that broken arm?"

"I was attacked by the peace marchers"

I mean, I really hate traffic.

I have no point. Unless Ashcroft is watching that is. Maybe I can get a "green" rating out of this.

 

[Suddenly]

2nd Amendment says "right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

The Federal Goverment (FAA) has passed laws that expressly forbid people from bearing arms on airplanes. That is a violation of everyones rights.

Without this unconstitutional restriction, airlines would still be free (under private property rights) to restrict firearms on their flights. They are not free to do this however, as the Federal Goverment mandates it.

Fly on a plane, or enter an airport terminal, and you magicly lose all your rights at the door. . I will never fly again.

1) You may have left something out of your telling of the Second Amendment. There were a few more words last time I checked.

2) "Magicly lose all your rights?" "All?" So if you go on a plane you can be legally executed without a jury trial?

 

[Suddenly]

Re: Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

9th Amendment. Plus, there's NOTHING WHATSOEVER in the Constitution giving the Federal government this power, so it is unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment as well.

Why cite an amendment? Shouldn't it just be pointed out that Jacko needs to identify where the federal government gets the legal power to do this in the first place?

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

Why cite an amendment? Shouldn't it just be pointed out that Jacko needs to identify where the federal government gets the legal power to do this in the first place?

Sure, but it never hurts to have the direct words of the Constitution on your side.

 

[Suddenly]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Airline Passenger Screening: Caps II

Sure, but it never hurts to have the direct words of the Constitution on your side.

Actually, if such a power were in the constitution, then the Amendments you mention wouldn't exactly help your case, would they? They (more or less) restrict the federal government to the powers mentioned in the constitution, so if such a power is included (say through the "commerce among the several states" or anything else) in the Constitution then those amendments would not prevent exercise of that power.