More security theatre

[Joe Guy]

In my younger daze, if I didn't want to drive, it was the airport to land in when going to Disneyland.

I saw John there many times.

He's much taller in real statue life.

[Scooter]

The boarding areas around the gates for flights bound for Washington National

Ahem...

That would I assume be Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport ?

I named it what US Airways called it on my booking documents and boarding pass, and what it was called on the monitors and at the boarding gate at the airport. Most airports named after people do not use that person's name to identify the airport in those contexts. People who are flying to Houston do not get documents and see signage referring to the George Bush Intercontinental Airport, they see "Houston" or sometimes "Houston Intercontinental". Why should an airport named after Ronald Reagan be any different>

[Joe Guy]

[font=][/font]

Why should an airport named after Ronald Reagan be any different>

I would like to be so bold as to answer this on behalf of Lord Jim...

Because Ronald Reagan single-handedly brought down the evil Soviet Empire...

[Lord Jim]

I wouldn't say single-handedly...

John Paul II certainly helped get the ball rolling...

Credit where credit is due....

[Big RR]

[quote]Most airports named after people do not use that person's name to identify the airport in those contexts/quote]

I agree; they are named by their location. The only exceptions I can think of are O'Hare, LaGuardia, and JFK, but then their previous names (Orchard Fields, North Beach, and Ildlewild (sp?)) didn't really incoroporate the name of the city where they are located.

[Gob]

And I wonder how many people even know which airport is call John Wayne?

Most people know it as Marion Morrison airport.

[dales]

[Scooter]

Security theatre redux:

I flew home today from Washington*. Go to a check in kiosk, must swipe my passport to get a boarding pass. Proceed to the security area, must present my passport to go through security. Get to my boarding gate, it is announced that I must bring my passport and boarding pass to the desk, where both are examined and the boarding pass is stamped "APPROVED" using a stamper that could be reproduced by anyone. Line up at the gate to get on the plane, where someone, not sure if an employee of the airline or of TSA, was walking up and down examining passports and boarding passes and scribbling a notation on each. Then pass by the agent right at the gate who looks at both documents again.

I get that every system requires some redundancy in order to perform as designed, but seriously, showing my passport five times between check in and the plane? Particularly when some of the steps are completely useless and others don't create additional assurance by being combined. Again, a big show being put on to give the impression that something is being done to increase airport security.






*in deference to Jim's feelings, I will refer to the airport I used as "the one that, in a fit of crass political partisanship, was renamed to honour a former B-movie actor"

[Gob]

Flew from Aus to UK, via Moscow last year.

Showed passport and boarding pass once at Sydney, once at Moscow, once at Heathrow. Reverse these for the return journey.

[rubato]

Security theatre redux:
... but seriously, showing my passport five times between check in and the plane? Particularly when some of the steps are completely useless and others don't create additional assurance by being combined. Again, a big show being put on to give the impression that something is being done to increase airport security.



"

Maybe the sequester will go through and the TSA will have to lay off half of their surplus people.

yrs,
rubato

[oldr_n_wsr]

Must be you scotter. I hear the biggest threats to US security are Canadains that support gay marriage.

[Andrew D]

In all the many times I have flown in and out of Washington National Airport, the fraction of people who have referred to it as "Reagan National" has been between 1% and 5%.

The overwhelming majority of Americans refer to it by its proper name -- "Washington National Airport".

... the most die-hard, unreconstructed sufferers of Reagan Derangement Syndrome....

The most prominent symptom of which is persistently including a photo of him -- with the prison bars conveniently removed -- with every posting ....

[Scooter]

So now the TSA wants to allow certain small knives in the cabin, in the name of allowing screening efforts to be focussed on discovering explosives, which they claim represent more of a threat.

All well and good, except that they have not anticipated what will happen, which is that screening areas will become a nightmare as passengers are held up while security agents have to take out rulers in order to settle disputes about whether a particular knife is allowable.

And I still will not be allowed to bring my peroxide-based contact lens cleaner on board, regardless of size, because the crude screening techniques used by TSA are incapable of distinguishing between concentrations that are harmless and those that could be used in making an explosive. As if spraying some on my skin and showing that it hasn't burned wouldn't be enough proof, but...

[Lord Jim]

I've been meaning to post about this knives thing...

I don't get it; who has been clamoring to have this done? How many people travel on planes with pocket knives anyway?

If they wanted to relax a restriction that the vast majority of the traveling public would actually care about, how about easing the 4 ounces of liquid rule?

[Crackpot]

Apparently they confiscate over 2000 knives if this sort a day. They think it takes too much time to bother with them.

[Lord Jim]

I haven't carried around a pocket knife since I was in the Boy Scouts...

[Scooter]

If they wanted to relax a restriction that the vast majority of the traveling public would actually care about, how about easing the 4 ounces of liquid rule?

Amen. I can't count how many times I have travelled, when all I needed would have fit in a carry on, when I needed to bring more mouthwash or whatever than the rule allows, and so had to check the bag. And now that it cost $25 to check a bag on many flights, I end up buying what I need at my destination and chucking whatever I don't use, to avoid having to pay that charge.

[Crackpot]

Odd DPM

[Crackpot]

I hate to say but I can see why they think they can ease on one but not the other. That being said, the entre TSA is an exercise in futility as it's trying to create a rule book of common sense.

What boggles my mind? They obstruct large bottles of labeled and for the most part easily identifiable liquids but allow small bottles of smaller completely non-descript liquids containing who knows what without question.

[Scooter]

I think there is a logic to it that relates to the volume of a substance that would be necessary to construct a bomb, and the volume of the container required to hold it. I think the idea is that by restricting both, they are substantially reducing the possibility that a bomb could be constructed using liquids that are allowed to be carried on.