Whatcha gonna do 'bout it?

[PUCKER]

On a totally serious note though, here is a tip to traveling by air, this saves me ALOT of aggravation/time: dress like are you going to the beach, well, if you can deal with wearing shorts/t-shirts (or Hawaiian-style shirts) year-round...I can/do. It makes going through security such a breeze. I feel for all the folks that literally have to strip down (coat off, jacket off, belt off, etc....) to go through. I wear suit and tie for work, but I always work my schedule so I can change out of my "monkey suit" and get into what I call my traveling attire. It's MUCH more comfy and better for my suits too. I know that some folks travel just for the day, meaning early flight out, do a deal, fly back that afternoon/evening....I rarely do that, most of my trips are 3 days minimum.

[VMI77]

[RANT]I would further add that it is the ease of flying these days (particularly if you get to do it from the pampered confines of an Air Force owned jet), as much as anything else, which has disconnected politicians in DC from the national sentiment.....or even the local sentiments within their own states. When a California congresswoman from San Francisco can fly to Los Angeles, she no longer has to speak to farmers in Fresno and Visalia along the way, or to give a darn about what her policies will do to food production in California. She can rub shoulders only with those who represent her own narrow set of interests. Flying may be a great time saver, but it also cuts people off from any sense of national identity.[/RANT]

I happened to be on a flight with Kay Bailey back in the 90s. There was no contact with us riffraff. This was a Southwest flight and her aide boarded the plane before anyone else and staked out a seat up front. KB let all the riffraff board so we wouldn't walk by her on our way in, then boarded and got into the seat her aide had saved for her. She was pretty well insulated during the flight with her aide sitting outboard and when we landed she was the first one off the plane.

[chasfm11]

I also wanted to point out one option to avoid the need for dealing with US TSA agents when you fly to / from France. You could always drive to Mexico or Canada, and then fly from there to France. May not be the most convenient option, and with Mexico, may not be the safest, but it is an option.

That reminds me of a point that hasn't been brought up again on this thread. While it is true that the US is the most politically rich target for terrorists, it isn't the ONLY target. The UK and Israel are both at least as high on the list of political scores but neither of them has anything that approximates the TSA approach and yet both seem to be able to keep their airplanes in the sky. The British government long ago surpassed the US in doing things that subjugate it's populace so I'm surprised that they won't have seized the opportunity for more of the same. But they have not. When even the Brits don't want to be part of it (and it the cost of the enhanced pat downs is minuscule compared to the backscatter machines), you have to wonder about the value.

[chasfm11]

I happened to be on a flight with Kay Bailey back in the 90s. There was no contact with us riffraff. This was a Southwest flight and her aide boarded the plane before anyone else and staked out a seat up front. KB let all the riffraff board so we wouldn't walk by her on our way in, then boarded and got into the seat her aide had saved for her. She was pretty well insulated during the flight with her aide sitting outboard and when we landed she was the first one off the plane.

I've read similar accounts of other politicians who not only worked their seating timing in a similar way but used their armed guards as a reason to bypass all security.

As far as I'm concerned, if our flight crews have to go through security, so does EVERYONE else. A pilot with bad intentions could take down a plane without hardly batting an eye. Why is he or she a security risk at the check in line?

[VMI77]

I happened to be on a flight with Kay Bailey back in the 90s. There was no contact with us riffraff. This was a Southwest flight and her aide boarded the plane before anyone else and staked out a seat up front. KB let all the riffraff board so we wouldn't walk by her on our way in, then boarded and got into the seat her aide had saved for her. She was pretty well insulated during the flight with her aide sitting outboard and when we landed she was the first one off the plane.

I've read similar accounts of other politicians who not only worked their seating timing in a similar way but used their armed guards as a reason to bypass all security.

As far as I'm concerned, if our flight crews have to go through security, so does EVERYONE else. A pilot with bad intentions could take down a plane without hardly batting an eye. Why is he or she a security risk at the check in line?

She didn't have any guards, just an aide (or maybe two, I don't remember). She stood off and clearly did not want to be approached by a member of the public.

Another time, on another Southwest flight, I saw some people bypassing the boarding gate and followed them for priority boarding (for reasons I won't go into here). This was during the campaign prior to W's first election, and it turned out the party I'd followed was Mrs. W, aides, and her SS agents. A flight attendant told her she'd enjoyed serving her mother-in-law on past flights and Mrs W. politely replied. What surprised me most was that the SS agents just looked at me and didn't tell me to leave. In fact, they didn't say a word, and I was allowed to board with the rest of the party.

[steveincowtown]

As far as I'm concerned, if our flight crews have to go through security, so does EVERYONE else. A pilot with bad intentions could take down a plane without hardly batting an eye. Why is he or she a security risk at the check in line?

Pilots can be FDO's (and I wish more were) and may be carrying a gun. I can't see screening these guys. Where would they put there gun during the pat down?

For some of us, travel is just a fact of life. Will I sit by and do nothing? No. Will stop flying? No. IMO Sometimes those who participate have a greater voice than those that don't. Merely avoiding flying means there are less people going through the TSA lines that will show their discontent.

[chasfm11]

For some of us, travel is just a fact of life. Will I sit by and do nothing? No. Will stop flying? No. IMO Sometimes those who participate have a greater voice than those that don't. Merely avoiding flying means there are less people going through the TSA lines that will show their discontent.

I was in a similar position and had to travel for a living. I don't any more so I can use my absence from planes as a part of my protest. I assure that it isn't a silent one.

I wished that I believed that those who are participating in flying have a greater voice - but I don't. I don't believe that anything that happens at the operational level at TSA has any impact on any policy. I feel sorry for most of the TSA employees as they are as powerless in this travesty as the flying public is. This is not a phenomenon that is unique to government. Many big companies also insulate the operational layer from any decision making input. It is common practice to "sacrifice" operational level employees when underlying policies and procedures are challenged. Policy makers can easily resort to "I didn't know" or simply blame low level people for not understanding the policy and executing properly. This disconnect is put there by design.

[VMI77]

I wished that I believed that those who are participating in flying have a greater voice - but I don't. I don't believe that anything that happens at the operational level at TSA has any impact on any policy. I feel sorry for most of the TSA employees as they are as powerless in this travesty as the flying public is. This is not a phenomenon that is unique to government. Many big companies also insulate the operational layer from any decision making input. It is common practice to "sacrifice" operational level employees when underlying policies and procedures are challenged. Policy makers can easily resort to "I didn't know" or simply blame low level people for not understanding the policy and executing properly. This disconnect is put there by design.

I agree, and you see this everywhere. This is why I usually don't complain about policy with salespeople, cashiers, or TSA agents (not that I've had the opportunity since I don't fly). Often the "grunts" hate the policy as much or more than the people they have to deal with, since a bad policy usually means having to deal with a lot of disgruntled people. For a long time I've had the attitude that people are more or less the same everywhere, and where they're doing bad things, or stupid things, it's the leadership or the management that is the problem.

[steveincowtown]

My point here is not that we should complain to the low level folks at the airport. The point is that if you called a store right now and said "I never shop in your store, and I am not a customer, and I have not been since 9/11, BUT I need this changed" the store owner would more than likely see no value in changing anything or accommodating you.

The TSA will have to adapt at some point, if the folks who drive the airline industry (business travelers) start complaining.

[e-bil]

Those who are customers that seen shopping and are put off by it and decide to go someplace else should be a concern.

[Shoot Straight]

If I did something about it, I wouldn't post details online before, during, or after.

[MeMelYup]

WARNING: Sarcasm and Twisted humor.
We need to have a law passed allowing CHL’s to board plains, trains or any other public transportation, without x-rays or pat-downs. Its good enough for our state capital it should be good enough for TSA and others. If you are going from Houston to Dallas one should be able to show their CHL to walk through the gate and board the plain, without disarming, and proceed to your destination within the state. If one is flying from Houston to Oklahoma City, as long as Texas has reciprocity with Oklahoma, it’s good to go.

[The Annoyed Man]

IMO Sometimes those who participate have a greater voice than those that don't.

That is absolutely true at the ballot box. It is not necessarily true when voting with your dollars. And like chasfm11 said, I'm not silent. I'm just not spending my money on airline tickets. Business travelers may be the primary class of customers, but when all NON business travelers stop flying, that is still at least a 25%-30% (if not more) drop in passenger manifests, and the airlines aren't going to ignore a 25%-30% cut in revenues if they can do anything about it.

And it isn't just the airlines either.... 25%-30% fewer passenger miles over time will eventually mean 25%-30% fewer aircraft orders. Maybe when Boeing, Airbus, and Bombadier begin experiencing a downturn in sales due to a downturn in flying travelers, they might start bringing pressure to bear.

In fact, I would argue that travelers who continue to fly have no leverage at all. The airlines have got you, and they're not going to lose you because your job requires you to fly; so they have no incentive to improve things for you. What will cause the airlines pain is the loss of customers who fly electively. Those that can take a train or bus, or drive, and who only fly because it is convenient. When the pain of flying exceeds the convenience, those customers will be gone. To get them back, the airlines will have to do something different. So the real leverage is with those who don't have to fly.

[Rifleman55]

My wife and I just got back from Germany,TSA was no worse than 6 years ago We walked through the metal detector in Houston, no man handeling or back scatter x-ray. The same in Germany.

[Liberty]

I used to fly all the time, I won't fly any,ore unless its a true emergency. I feel that we have inflicted pain on the airlines, because there are fewer of us flying, the airlines are staffing fewer flights and the Airlines that co-conspired with TSA are closing shop.

The only problem is that the airlines don't seem to understand why people are staying away, and just play along with the regulators and bureaucrats whose sole reason to exist is to increase the power and size of their agency.