Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Airlines Have to Ask Permission to Fly 72 Hours Early

ScuttleMonkey posted about 7 years ago | from the papers-papers-please dept.

United States 596

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."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Back in the day when I was the young guy (1, Interesting)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 7 years ago | (#20955707)

When I was the young guy with no family- I remember having to go home from work one day, pack, come back to work, then drive to Portland to catch a flight in under 3 hours, while the travel agent got me boarding passes at the call desk.

I'd suggest that certain people be allowed to willingly give up privacy in return for fast track at the airport through the TSA.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy (1, Insightful)

leesweet (868202) | about 7 years ago | (#20958677)

Right... is everyone that needs to go somewhere *right now* supposed to a member of the 'trusted passenger' program (whatever the current name is) whenever it exists between all major airports? I can't see the 72 hour working, on many levels.

Re:Back in the day when I was the young guy (5, Interesting)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 7 years ago | (#20958803)

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:Back in the day when I was the young guy (5, Interesting)

dgatwood (11270) | about 7 years ago | (#20959057)

With apologies in advance to Jonathan Swift [] , 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 (5, Insightful)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | about 7 years ago | (#20959277)

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:Back in the day when I was the young guy (4, Insightful)

ChronosWS (706209) | about 7 years ago | (#20958977)

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 (4, Insightful)

crankyspice (63953) | about 7 years ago | (#20959071)

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 (5, Insightful)

einhverfr (238914) | about 7 years ago | (#20959179)

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.

I hate to throw a brink in the arguement... (5, Insightful)

Samalie (1016193) | about 7 years ago | (#20959285)

...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).

Sensationalist Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958687)

I 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.

This story is bad enough without slashdot trying to spice it up with sensational headlines and scaremongering. How about some real editing around here?

Re:Sensationalist Headline (4, Insightful)

walt-sjc (145127) | about 7 years ago | (#20959041)

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...

say goodbuy (4, Insightful)

russ1337 (938915) | about 7 years ago | (#20958691)

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 (1)

SlamMan (221834) | about 7 years ago | (#20958737)

Say hello to stock in Polycom and Tandberg!

Re:say goodbuy (5, Insightful)

igjeff (15314) | about 7 years ago | (#20958771)

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 (4, Insightful)

walt-sjc (145127) | about 7 years ago | (#20959085)

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 (2)

hkfczrqj (671146) | about 7 years ago | (#20959291)

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 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958801)

at comment misspelling []

You say goodbye
And I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello

I say high
You say low
You say why
And I say I don't know
Oh, oh no

You say goodbye
And I say hello
Hello, goodbye
Hello, goodbye
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello-o hello-o

Hey la, hey hey lo ah hey
Hey la, hey hey lo ah hey

Re:say goodbuy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959023)

In other words, say goodbye to the old economy, because us little startups just got *another* advantage over the old big slow guys. Woo!

Re:say goodbuy (4, Insightful)

griffjon (14945) | about 7 years ago | (#20959033)

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 (5, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 7 years ago | (#20959119)

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:say goodbuy (1)

15Bit (940730) | about 7 years ago | (#20959157)

> say goodbye to the economy...

What economy? Thats already on long term vacation itself. Of course, if the dollar drops much lower the economy might pick up again as shoppers from other countries decide its worth going to the US even with the stupid flight restrictions.

I noticed The Economist jokingly described the US dollar as the "Yankee Lira", a witty resposte to a more famous quote a few years back that called the canadian dollar the "Northern Peso". I must say, i did laugh.

Your payperz, plezz (5, Interesting)

TrentTheThief (118302) | about 7 years ago | (#20958701)

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 (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958751)

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 (1)

TrentTheThief (118302) | about 7 years ago | (#20958905)

LOL! I completely forgot about that!

Re:Your payperz, plezz (1)

discogravy (455376) | about 7 years ago | (#20959013)

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

Re:Your payperz, plezz (4, Funny)

Alsee (515537) | about 7 years ago | (#20959155)

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:Your payperz, plezz (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about 7 years ago | (#20959205)

Actually, you can still fly. But you've got to have a buddy with a plane, or your own plane and a license, or you can rent the plane.

Come to think of it, I think you're fine as long as you don't use metropolitan airport terminal.

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.

It's really the only civilized way to fly which is why it's good enough for Nancy Pelosi and Dick Cheney alike!

Re:Your payperz, plezz (2, Funny)

cashman73 (855518) | about 7 years ago | (#20958755)

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

Re:Your payperz, plezz (1)

jdcope (932508) | about 7 years ago | (#20958917)

well, "free" unless you cross the Russian mob, or Putin's government. (They are interchangeable.) Ask a few Russian reporters about their "freedom of speech" to speak about the government. Wait, you cant. They're dead.

Re:Your payperz, plezz (1)

deacon (40533) | about 7 years ago | (#20959279)

Back when you were young, the USSR requiered citizens to get permission to MOVE to a different place. All housing and employment was controlled by the State. Citizens who cause trouble (like printing samizdat) ended up working in uranium mines in Siberia or were killed in phsychiatric hospitals. Protests were met by machine gun fire. Citizens were not allowed to leave the country.

I know it's fashionable to get your panties in a damp twist over any security measure in the USA, but you trivialize the real, stone cold horror of life under Soviet communism. You and your parents are obviously pampered westerners, or you would never think to make the comparison.

oh boy (4, Insightful)

NiceGeek (126629) | about 7 years ago | (#20958709)

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

Re:oh boy (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958845)

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! (5, Funny)

Dusty00 (1106595) | about 7 years ago | (#20958711)

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:I can see it now! (1)

sh3l1 (981741) | about 7 years ago | (#20958899)

That may very well be a good thing...

Re:I can see it now! (2, Insightful)

darkonc (47285) | about 7 years ago | (#20959005)

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! (1)

kRutOn (28796) | about 7 years ago | (#20959095)

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.

Wait, they all fly on private jets so these rules wouldn't affect them. Besides, it's too inconvenient to drive to a commercial airport when they each have a private runway outside their ivory towers.

what about ... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958717)

flying on time ? :-)

Completely impractical? (3, Insightful)

jandrese (485) | about 7 years ago | (#20958729)

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:Completely impractical? (1)

peterd11 (800684) | about 7 years ago | (#20958791)

Also, wouldn't the airlines be concerned about the loss of income, since they charge last-minute fliers a premium?

Re:Completely impractical? (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 7 years ago | (#20958857)

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.

Re:Completely impractical? (1)

mr_mischief (456295) | about 7 years ago | (#20958987)

Surely you can be cleared for that flight and any makeup flights for it. Now if you have to do the alternate air carrier seat swap, that might be another story. Most of the airlines will put you on a flight with another carrier if they have no more flights of their own to a certain location when a flight is canceled. They trade seats that way all the time, or at least they used to. This could be the end of that.

Welcome to Amerika (2, Interesting)

IdeaMan (216340) | about 7 years ago | (#20958733)

Where we have our very own Iron Curtain (it just goes the other way).
Here's the progression:
No, we don't let you in.
You can leave, but not with your money.
You can leave, just give us 72 hours to make sure you're not on our list of Bad People (anyone we don't like).
"you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave"

Re:Welcome to Amerika (1, Informative)

Ziest (143204) | about 7 years ago | (#20959233)

Where we have our very own Iron Curtain (it just goes the other way).
Here's the progression:
No, we don't let you in.
You can leave, but not with your money.
You can leave, just give us 72 hours to make sure you're not on our list of Bad People (anyone we don't like).

As a Jew who grew up with great aunts and uncles who survived nazi germany and was told the their story many times, this sounds exactly how things went after the nazi came to power in 1933. Any one old enough to remember the cold war, this is exactly the sort of shit we used to get down on the soviets about. Look up "Enabling Act of 1933" and "Reichstag fire" on wikipedia. Wake up, the downward spiral of this country has begun.

Urgency (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958741)

rights aside, what if I need to fly out at a moment's notice. okay, most nations need visa so we have enough margin to buy tickets early but what about Canada? (I am not aware of other nations that let US citizens in without obtaining prior clearance.)

Re:Urgency (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958823)

I am not aware of other nations that let US citizens in without obtaining prior clearance.

How about all of the European Union?

Re:Urgency (3, Informative)

Taeolas (523275) | about 7 years ago | (#20958943)

Canadian Travel and Airline groups are pissed about those proposals too ( [] ). 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 we'll see more Montreal->Moncton->Caribbean flights so they can use the 'just skirting around the edges' clause of the proposals).

Civil Protest Idea... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958749)

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:Civil Protest Idea... (1)

no_pets (881013) | about 7 years ago | (#20958843)

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

This proposal is DOA. (4, Interesting)

CodeShark (17400) | about 7 years ago | (#20958767)

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."

Re:This proposal is DOA. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959045)

we go where we like when we like and how we like without Uncle Sam knowing where we are.
this is not a troll- i have never seen a response to this question that made sense to me.

WHY do we care if uncle sam knows? Why is privacy such a big deal?

I do like having privacy, but i dont understand why we should expect to be guaranteed privacy for things we do out in public.

Re:This proposal is DOA. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959303)

WHY do we care if uncle sam knows? Why is privacy such a big deal?

The practical answer is that invasion of privacy is so easily abused by those in power either for political or personal gain.

May I suggest.. (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 7 years ago | (#20958781)

"Airlines may have to submit passenger list 72 hours before flight," or perhaps "No airline tickets to be issued within 72 hrs of departure" as better headlines. I'm sure others can come up with better ones. The headline as written just doesn't parse well.

I think this is ridiculous, and the TSA and DHS have gotten way out of hand. What's worse is that I know people who think it's actually making us safer. Sad. Truly sad.

Re:May I suggest.. (2, Insightful)

Marc Desrochers (606563) | about 7 years ago | (#20959237)

Ask them: Safer than what?

For all the liberties that have been removed, how exactly have any of the new "security" measures helped prevent any threat coming from outside the country. Anyone intent on doing harm, will find a way through. Terrorism indeed, the U.S. (government that is) is truly terrified. The bad guys are winning.

Missed flights? (4, Insightful)

WPIDalamar (122110) | about 7 years ago | (#20958789)

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.

Re:Missed flights? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959203)

probably won't matter if you miss your flight - if you were supposed to be on a flight already then you will have been cleared. Of course, that's how a sane system (not that this idea is in any way sane in the first place) would work. What happens when the beaurocrats get their hands on it is anyone's guess though.

captcha: complied

Re:Missed flights? (1)

hublan (197388) | about 7 years ago | (#20959289)

Not if they have to re-route you through a different hub. Then the original clearance would most likely be invalid.

What about funerals/bereavement fares? (2, Interesting)

coug_ (63333) | about 7 years ago | (#20958809)

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.

Re:What about funerals/bereavement fares? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 7 years ago | (#20958881)

Well, you can drive just about anywhere in the states in 2 days, given a driving partner and a bunch of coffee. That's probably not but 12-24 hours slower than a jet, and a full day faster than the 72 hour rule. Then again, you'll probably be mentally trashed for two additional days. On the bright side, crying uncontrollably at funerals is fully acceptable, so you'd probably fit right in. Weddings too for that matter, should you be, um, invited to a sudden wedding on short notice.

Re:What about funerals/bereavement fares? (1)

steveo777 (183629) | about 7 years ago | (#20959175)

Pretty much how it works. I have personally made a 1300 mile trip from point A to B (not going to say, because I don't want "them" finding out about it) via car in just under 18 hours. Now, driving the 'speed limit' it should take 21 hours. And that's not including gas stops. My car was pretty gas efficient (35+) with a 17 gallon tank, so I'd make 500 miles before the gas light came on. This was with one other driver. And we were willing to drive... 'efficiently' to get to our destination. Fill up 3 times. Bring only water. Switch every four hours. Easy.

Not saying I'd ever want to do this in the case of an emergency. I prepare for this trip by not ingesting caffeine in any form for three weeks prior to get it out of my system. That way I can get in the zone and cruise along.

Re:What about funerals/bereavement fares? (1)

SlamMan (221834) | about 7 years ago | (#20958985)

Jewish law dictates that when someone dies, they're to be buried as soon as possible. Within 24 hours is preferred (as I understand it - I'm not Jewish). Seeing how we have 13 Jewish Senators and something like 35 Jewish members of the House (via Wikipedia [] ), I see this being nixed somewhat quickly.

Don't worry folks (4, Funny)

jtroutman (121577) | about 7 years ago | (#20958879)

This'll never fly.

Re:Don't worry folks (4, Funny)

Grygus (1143095) | about 7 years ago | (#20959121)

Not for 72 hours, anyway.

Attention America ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20958885)

Go fuck yourselves.

Sincerely, the rest of the world.

Re:Attention America ... (1)

mr_mischief (456295) | about 7 years ago | (#20959063)

Attention the rest of the world ... this isn't the people of America trying to do this stupid shit. Sincerely, an ordinary American.

Attention TSA, what that guy said. Sincerely, regular Americans (and apparently the rest of the world, too).

This is just what Bin Laden wants (4, Insightful)

G4from128k (686170) | about 7 years ago | (#20958893)

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.

The Terrorists Won (1)

INeededALogin (771371) | about 7 years ago | (#20958953)

Sad but true.

Re:The Terrorists Won (1)

Vicarius (1093097) | about 7 years ago | (#20959225)

True indeed. Remember on the September 11th what everyone was saying? "They will not change our American way of life!" They won big time.

Load of fear-mongering crap (5, Informative)

amcdiarmid (856796) | about 7 years ago | (#20958903)

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.

Re:Load of fear-mongering crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959053)

Also increasing number of air marshals

The train might actually be faster! (1)

Radon360 (951529) | about 7 years ago | (#20958907)

If something this silly were enacted, it might be possible to get to a last-minute travel destination faster via Amtrak than by plane...despite some of their trains being up to 18 hours late occasionally.

Greyhound?? Eeesh...let's not even go there.

I'll Defund TSA, if Elected. (4, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | about 7 years ago | (#20958911)

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 (5, Insightful)

Knight of Shadows (1163917) | about 7 years ago | (#20958919)

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.

Re:Send a Message - Don't Fly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959231)

No chance that the government will bail them out like they did last time?

If I ever win the lottery, I guess I'm outta luck (4, Interesting)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | about 7 years ago | (#20958927)

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?


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.

Faster to drive (2, Informative)

devnullkac (223246) | about 7 years ago | (#20958931)

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.

Re:Faster to drive (1)

pthisis (27352) | about 7 years ago | (#20959199)

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


Miami, FL to Anchorage, AK is 5,000 miles by car. Even factoring in the 11-12 hour flight it's still faster to wait 3 days and fly (especially since you're not going to average 60 MPH on that drive).

FUD - can transmit data up to 30 min before flight (4, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 7 years ago | (#20958935)

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.


Sounds good to me.

Mod Parent down - author has too much common sense (3, Insightful)

dtolman (688781) | about 7 years ago | (#20959167)

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 (5, Insightful)

RaigetheFury (1000827) | about 7 years ago | (#20958937)

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.

Let's do the same in Europe (1)

shd666 (451529) | about 7 years ago | (#20958939)

Sadly, if these was implemented, it would probably be an inconvenience for many people. Heck, let's do the same for people traveling from US to Europe. Maybe symmetric action on this matter will open more eyes. Actually, we could do much more. We could put up a farce of unuseful landing checkings for everyone from US. Certainly it will do both sides harm, but at least it's fair ;)

500,000 to 750,000 Terrorists in The US? (5, Insightful)

Slashdot Parent (995749) | about 7 years ago | (#20958947)

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? (2, Interesting)

oh2 (520684) | about 7 years ago | (#20959137)

Makes you wonder where all this paranoia will end, doesnt it ? If the no-fly list really has as many as 750k people on it maybe its time to take a step back and consider if the criteria for getting on it arent just a teensy bit farked up.

Re:500,000 to 750,000 Terrorists in The US? (5, Informative)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 7 years ago | (#20959143)

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.

Re:500,000 to 750,000 Terrorists in The US? (1)

Twintop (579924) | about 7 years ago | (#20959147)

There are 300M people in the US. Are you seriously telling me that at least 1 in 600 is on a terrorist watch list?
It's more likely than you think. A good friend of mine (that has only ever been in the USA and a short trip to Australia, mind you) has a very Irish name and is on the watch list because it is exactly the same as a revolutionary / terrorist from Northern Ireland.

Will this include Members of Congress? (1)

Roblimo (357) | about 7 years ago | (#20958949)

I suspect that along about the 3rd time a Congresscritter needs to fly home in a hurry, and can't, this regulation is going to go away -- assuming it gets through in the first place.

- Robin

Connecting (1)

TheOrangeMan (884380) | about 7 years ago | (#20958965)

So... If someone misses a connexion he'll have to wait for three days? Excuse me while go and buy a cheap motel and a car rental place dangerously close to an airport.

So it takes 3 days to look a name up in a database (4, Interesting)

RichMan (8097) | about 7 years ago | (#20958983)

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.

What are they really up to then? (2, Insightful)

jamie(really) (678877) | about 7 years ago | (#20959075)

This is just a deliberately outrageous proposal so that their real goals don't seem so bad. Like when we had a guy yesterday saying that $9250 per song wasn't so bad because it could have been $150,000. This is how parents deal with children. Interesting that it seems to work on the majority of the adult population (including many /.ers).

Original story (1)

Joe U (443617) | about 7 years ago | (#20959077)

I had a glimpse of the original story:

Lord Twitter, slayer of the dark lord William of Gates, wrote to mention that the M$A has released a new set of proposed rules that is raising quite a stir among groups ranging from the ACLU to the Free penguin society. Under the new rules everyone would be required to install Micro$oft software on all computers everywhere. M$ would then be using M$ to M$ and M$, with M$ and M$. Occasionally M$ and M$ would have to M$.

It goes downhill from there.

Yeah, I don't like twit ter

Re:Original story (1)

dedazo (737510) | about 7 years ago | (#20959243)

I don't know why the Slashdot editors continue to accept stories from a known troll with negative karma who uses sockpuppets [] to game Slashdot [] . I mean, surely someone else submitted this?

I'm surprised he didn't submit this [] jewel from his entertaining journal though. Oh, wait. I know why.

Re:Original story (1)

dtolman (688781) | about 7 years ago | (#20959301)

But posting an accurate, FUDless article would mean the slashdot editors couldn't pimp their fears that we live in a fascist police state - and thats even worse than posting articles from a troll.

the real threat (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 7 years ago | (#20959123)

IMHO Osma won, allowed a more rapid trashing of the Constitution. Since 9/11, the pretext of security everywhere and Patriot Act are much greater dangers to most US citizens. I have never been threatened by an international terrorist, although there was a little misunderstanding with a Cuban soldier some years ago in southern Africa. I have seen several countries pre- and post- revolution. However, since 9/11 I have seen several things that make me question my safety around various "security" agents here at home, public or private, more than with the agitated Cuban soldier (probably longer, more continuous exposure, more deferential attitudes in some places, and fewer allowances here for strangers).

What a waste of money and effort (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959153)

We could just about go back to pre-9/11 levels of airport security but keep the stronger cockpit doors, and everything would be fine.

Why? Because I pity the fool who would try to hijack a flight in the US nowadays. The days of "just cooperate with them and everything'll be cool" are OVER. The other passengers will enthusiastically tear him/them apart. For that not to happen, there'd have to be more terrorists than regular passengers on the plane by a comfortable margin.

500,000 to 750,000 People (1)

BarlowBrad (940854) | about 7 years ago | (#20959171)

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.'
So 500,000 to 750,000 determined people (read: terrorists) are all it would take to kill an entire nation of 300 million? That's just 0.2% of the nation. I'm not sure whether I should be shocked or call BS.

Doesn't make any difference to me (0, Troll)

Tim Ward (514198) | about 7 years ago | (#20959183)

I have already decided that I'm not going to visit the USA any more because it's just too much hassle. So if it's made more hassle then that won't have any effect on me.

That last 10% is the killer (1)

darkonc (47285) | about 7 years ago | (#20959193)

The TSA estimates that 90 to 93 per cent of all travel reservations are final by then.
That last 7-10% is the first-class and business class travelers who provide 90% of the airlines' profit margin. Being unable to create (or change) your travel arrangements less than 3 days out is going to kill the airlines' profit. (if you'll excuse the pun).

Agent: I need a seat on your next flight to Seattle.
clerk: I'm sorry sir, I can't clear you for a flight less than 3 days out
Agent: But there's a possible terror attack planned for today and I need to get there to investigate.
clerk: Sorry sir. TSA rules.....
Agent: But I work for the TSA!
clerk: <grins from ear to ear> Nothing I can do. Excuse me, I have another customer to take care of. ...

Get over it. The terrorists have won. (5, Insightful)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 7 years ago | (#20959211)

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 [] 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

End of my flying days, then (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#20959267)

Well, the drive to visit my family takes fewer than three days so there's no point in flying if they implement these rules. Driving is more expensive and time consuming it's true, but I enjoy driving a lot more than flying. Besides, who needs the aggravation of having to stand in a hour-long lines and rampant privacy violations? The only time I'd bother flying is if I were leaving the country for whatever reason (vacation, or perhaps fleeing a repressive government hell-bent on micromanaging my life at the expense of everything our founding fathers held dear).

Two Things are Striking (1)

hoppo (254995) | about 7 years ago | (#20959281)

First, for everyone who is screaming about their privacy rights being violated, they're not. You have no right to move and interact in the public with others and remain anonymous. You are not free to travel US airspace in any way you see fit. Never have been. The government controls airspace and air travel, and can do whatever it pleases.

HOWEVER... this is a terrible policy proposal. It seeks to impose very real hardships on air travelers while providing no benefit whatsoever. You can't realistically eliminate emergency air travel, or even last-minute travel for business travelers. What about missed connections? Is it really feasible to make someone wait three days to finish a travel leg because of an airline delay? No, it is not. These cases represent a significant number of passengers. If you make exceptions for them, it casts doubt on the reasoning for the policy. If you don't, you can literally cripple the air travel industry, which in case no one noticed isn't exactly going gangbusters right now.

This was the danger of increasingly federalizing airport security -- now the TSA seeks to promote its own mammoth growth. The only group to benefit from this proposal is the TSA. Imagine the budget they'd have to have in order to implement this program. They've now become a typical government agency.

Fabulous! No more emergency repair trips! (1)

Tsu Dho Nimh (663417) | about 7 years ago | (#20959293)

All of you who have scrambled to make a flight to go fix something critical must be overjoyed.

No more emergency repairs! Tell the customer that you'll be there in three days, and to call the DHS if they have a problem with waiting for you.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?