4 ms·
I think for the average passenger, that's very true. For frequent flyers, the airport experience has actually improved in many ways. Global Entry and PreCheck
by saryant 12y ago
I think for the average passenger, that's very true. For frequent flyers, the airport experience has actually improved in many ways. Global Entry and PreCheck make airport formalities much less inconvenient (I sped through LAX immigration and customs in under 60 seconds on Wednesday). OTOH, most passengers were stuck in line for a very long time. The TSA is actually tolerable when you have PreCheck—I'm sitting in PDX right now and clearing security took no time at all, no one in front of me, no nude-o-scope, kept my shoes on.
But yeah, for most passengers it really sucks.
- takeda 12y agoSo making the flying unbearable first, then implementing (for an extra fee) PreCheck to make it a little better, you call an advancement?
- jryle70 12y agoUnbearable? We all know TSA and PreCheck was the result of 9/11. Remember the public outrage of the terrorists being allowed to sneak in knives to hijack the planes? Little less known is how common hijacking was in the 1960s. Back then one could go straight to the gate from the airport lounge. No security check. http://listverse.com/2012/10/27/top-10-us-airline-hijackings-of-the-sixties/ http://listverse.com/2012/10/27/top-10-us-airline-hijackings... Some guy was even able to carry a machine gun onboard! This was in the US alone. Most of security procedures today were the result of those events. When was the last time you heard of an hijack in the US? So yes, airport security is real PITA, and ideally I'd love not to subject to it. But to say it was implemented on a whim is a gross neglect of history events.