3 ms·
The problem boils down to two issues: 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? 2. Nobody wants to be the politic
by anal_reactor 2y ago
The problem boils down to two issues:
1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security?
2. Nobody wants to be the politician that relaxes the security right before an accident, even if the accident wouldn't be prevented with tighter security anyway.
- cyberax 2y ago> 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? Amazingly, you can do that. SFO doesn't use the TSA, for example.
- rachofsunshine 2y agoDoes it not? I fly out of SFO all the time and the experience is very similar. I guess I never checked if it was officially the TSA, but I never noticed any difference.
- rst 2y agoSFO security is run by some company "under contract" to TSA -- probably required to follow all the same procedures, so it's not clear the business arrangement makes that much difference to the passengers. I've been through there a few times, and haven't found it any more organized or pleasant... https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-security https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-secur...
- jen20 2y agoYou can only do that if there are competing airports that are equally usable for where you want to go. Perhaps SFO vs SJC if you're going to the peninsula, JFK vs EWR or LGA, or the various Los Angeles airports but that's pretty much it that I can think of.