Photo ID check for QF DOM at LST check-in

[justinbrett]

I think you are mixing having IDs checked by airport staff with that by law enforcement agencies. Have you ever seen airport staff scanning IDs and checking that against a central database? Or, do I not understand it...???

Yes - the TSA are federal employees, they are part of the department of Homeland Security. They are not airport staff in the way most people would define airport staff.

And yes, in the US they scan every ID (including drivers licences for US citizens) and it does check a database. Also why they now have the Real ID program and every state must comply, or else those citizens will require a passport for domestic travel. That's how they enforce the no fly list etc. This has been my point all along.

 

[hossein_au]

Yes - the TSA are federal employees, they are part of the department of Homeland Security. They are not airport staff in the way most people would define airport staff.

And yes, in the US they scan every ID (including drivers licences for US citizens) and it does check a database. Also why they now have the Real ID program and every state must comply, or else those citizens will require a passport for domestic travel. That's how they enforce the no fly list etc. This has been my point all along.

We seem to talk past each other. There are a number of issues that you seem to lump together and it gets rather murky:

Point 1) There are technical issues and there are strategic issues. Technically, all data can be checked against a federal database. I believe, when there is a need, this has to be done by federal agents that are vetted according to the access they are afforded. Last thing anyone wants is for someone off the street getting employed by a sub-sub-sub-contractor and having access to a federal database with god-knows what level of detail about every man and his/her dog. There are also strategic issues that set/limit access to federal, state, and local authorities. Strategic issues are interesting on their own, but warrant a separate line of discussion.

Point 2) TSA set up in the US is hardly a set up anyone should aspire to. The fact that TSA does anything in a certain way, to anyone in the know, is a red flag that there has to be a better way. TSA has been proven to be a measly 2% effective in stopping forbidden items getting into sterile area of airports. Furthermore, they have stopped exactly ZERO terrorist activities. TSA is more of a publicity stunt machine to make people feel warm and fuzzy, without actually doing anything to keep them safe. It is there for political reasons, not a technical one.

Point 3) We already have world-class law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Australia. Should we be complacent? Absolutely no. Should we just copy another country's model? Hell no. We are already doing pretty good, and we should strive to improve what we have rather than blind-copying another country's system.

Point 4) Should governments erode any more of our personal liberties that they absolutely have to in order to keep us safe? I argue, no. I don't have anything to hide, but I also live in a modern/democratic/free society, and I do not want to feel I am being watched 24/7, online and offline. If we concede our liberty, terrorists have already won.

 

[justinbrett]

We seem to talk past each other. There are a number of issues that you seem to lump together and it gets rather murky:

Point 1) There are technical issues and there are strategic issues. Technically, all data can be checked against a federal database. I believe, when there is a need, this has to be done by federal agents that are vetted according to the access they are afforded. Last thing anyone wants is for someone off the street getting employed by a sub-sub-sub-contractor and having access to a federal database with god-knows what level of detail about every man and his/her dog. There are also strategic issues that set/limit access to federal, state, and local authorities. Strategic issues are interesting on their own, but warrant a separate line of discussion.

Point 2) TSA set up in the US is hardly a set up anyone should aspire to. The fact that TSA does anything in a certain way, to anyone in the know, is a red flag that there has to be a better way. TSA has been proven to be a measly 2% effective in stopping forbidden items getting into sterile area of airports. Furthermore, they have stopped exactly ZERO terrorist activities. TSA is more of a publicity stunt machine to make people feel warm and fuzzy, without actually doing anything to keep them safe. It is there for political reasons, not a technical one.

Point 3) We already have world-class law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Australia. Should we be complacent? Absolutely no. Should we just copy another country's model? Hell no. We are already doing pretty good, and we should strive to improve what we have rather than blind-copying another country's system.

Point 4) Should governments erode any more of our personal liberties that they absolutely have to in order to keep us safe? I argue, no. I don't have anything to hide, but I also live in a modern/democratic/free society, and I do not want to feel I am being watched 24/7, online and offline. If we concede our liberty, terrorists have already won.

Yep, this is getting painful.

You can book a domestic flight in Australia on a completely made up name and travel. You can't do this in the USA.

I'm done.