Hacker News Reader

Comment by phpisthebest | Hacker News Reader

It is not the agents I have a problem with, it is the process. You are correct the agents are normally friendly and efficient. I have objections about the process from having to take all your crap out, take your belt off, shoes, no liquids, stand with your hand over your head while someone in another room passed millimeter waves through you taking a look at a near pornographic photo of you...

That does not seem like things a person not accused or convicted of a crime in a free society should have to be subjected to just to travel, that seems like something you would find in a Authoritarian dystopia novel not a free society

View on HN

I opt-out of the scanner. Every time. It rarely delays me more than 10 minutes (and usually 3-5).

I personally think it’s an unreasonable search (meaning, there’s a less intrusive way to accomplish the legitimate goal that TSA has); it seems like they don’t want to have that tested in court, so the opt-out process avoids giving a pax that standing to sue over it.

I agree completely. Somehow I've decided flying isn't my hill to die on and so i just try and go though the process as efficiently as possible, which ends up making it relatively painless. We shouldn't have to put up with it though.

I always opt out. Very occasionally the screeners are grumpy, but usually completely indifferent or a little curious about why opt out (do you know something about the radiation?). The time difference is negligible from what I've seen.

Get TSA Pre and you don't have to do almost anything. Not even the mm wave scanner.

I'm not even sure it's faster.

I flew out very early one morning and put my toothbrush, etc, in a small plastic bag and stuffed it into my duffel.

The scanner detected the liquid so they pulled me to the side. As soon as the TSA agent saw the bag with the toothbrush she made a "ugh" sound, had an annoyed look on her face, then closed everything back up and let me through.

Which tells me this is a very common occurrence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com