I've noticed that some airports (Raleigh-Durham and Seattle) have separate security lines for first class passengers -- so that they can proceed more quickly through the metal detectors.
I have no problem with people being able to pay for first class treatment on an airplane.
But security is a governmental service and duty and the notion that people who pay less for a for-profit ticket are treated as second class citizens when it comes to security screening might even raises constitutional concerns of equal protection and privliges and immunities.
Especially in the post 911 era, the idea of "United We Stand" is undermined when rich people literally stand in a different and privliged security line.
I agree
No opinion
I disagree
Add your comment
Hear, hear!
While I agree with Ian in principle, I think that separate lines acually benefit everyone. For the most part, first class travelers are frequent flyers who have upgraded to that cabin. Anything that the airlines can do to move those travelers through security more quickly helps to decrease the time in takes for other travelers in the regular lines. While some might see it primarily as a benefit, I actually see it as intelligent traffic flow. In airports I've been through that have it, I found that it greatly simplifies the entire process.
Ian, I understand your objection, but I think it in this case there is actually a viable argument in favor of this approach.
Jeff
Your point is well made, Ian. I couldn't agree more. As for frequent flyers and first class, I frequently fly at least four times a month, in coach, and I am subject to those long lines waiting to be confronted by the bottom of humanity's intellectual chain.If anyone is under the impression that airport security is far better since 9/11, well, fly more and see.How about smart cards and readers that make positive ID. complete a form on a goverment (TSA) web site and let them do a background check. After completion a card would be issued and bingo, no more lines for that guy!
What happens to the first class line once those passengers have passed through? Certainly there are many fewer first class passengers, and they already board first. Do those security screeners go away or do they then help the regular passengers?
I think if these are TSA employees that are not at the gate, but are at the main entrance to the terminals, then I'm certainly for your idea. The TSA is taxpayer sponsored, and it's absurd to suggest that first class passengers are somehow safer or more trustworthy.
I'm sure the 9/11 hijackers would have paid a few hundred more dollars to get a security pass should it be believed that such customers are more trustworthy and therefore get more lax security screening.
The pre-authenticated party idea sounds good, but again it wouldn't really help anything but the system created to support it. In the end, the 9/11 terrorists would have been able to apply for such an ID since they didn't all have prior criminal histories. All first-time criminals (or at least those who have not yet been caught even if they've committed many crimes before) would get away with less security, helping them avoid detection once again.
In the end, the best security was locking the cockpit doors against such an attack, basic screening for true weapons (not nail clippers and the like), and ensuring that luggage is tracked to the party carrying it. But with those willing to die for their cause, there's very little that can be done to prevent those crimes. Most other security measures, including photo IDs, have done nothing to make life safer. Every 9/11 hijacker presented such ID; therefore it does not help matters at all.