Air travel restrictions

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unlike, I suspect, the overwhelming majority of participants in this thread, I've been subject to these restrictions (has anyone else?), and I have to say that for me personally it was really no big deal. I read a book and watched the in-flight film. Not the end of the world to be parted from my Kindle for 6h.

I think the point for some if not many is that the vast majority of our book purchases over the last several years have been ebooks rather than paper books, so buying a paper book just to read it on the plane is a step back. A lot of people read books, watch movies and listen to music on their mobile phone or tablet these days rather than depend on in flight movies or airline music channels.

Plus, in general, one either says rules are rules even if the rule doesn't make sense, or says gee that's a stupid rule. This is a case of "gee that's a stupid rule". For the most part, such restrictions are either CYA or security Kabuki rather than rational responses to real threats.

[Bilbo1967]

Of course, even if you'd rather not be subjected to certain security procedures, if you live in the UK and want to visit many places, not flying isn't an option.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Of course, even if you'd rather not be subjected to certain security procedures, if you live in the UK and want to visit many places, not flying isn't an option.

Luckily for me, I have more than enough places to visit in western Washington and Oregon so I don't miss flying to get somewhere. I avoid British Columbia because of the border checkpoints.

[piperclassique]

Oh, you can leave the UK without flying. Boats and trains... Over the sea or by tunnel. All the way to Asia. It does take a little longer. 😀

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Luckily for me, I have more than enough places to visit in western Washington and Oregon so I don't miss flying to get somewhere. I avoid British Columbia because of the border checkpoints.

I've visited Washington, Oregon and British Columbia (about half an hour over the checkpoint, even as a non-North American). Nice as they were (and they really were), I can't imagine never visiting anywhere else.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by piperclassique

Oh, you can leave the UK without flying. Boats and trains... Over the sea or by tunnel. All the way to Asia. It does take a little longer. 😀

Very true. When we visit France we always use the Eurotunnel and drive. Anywhere else is a little far

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

I've visited Washington, Oregon and British Columbia (about half an hour over the checkpoint, even as a non-North American). Nice as they were (and they really were), I can't imagine never visiting anywhere else.

I can understand that. If that was all I ever visited, then I'd feel deprived. But in my life, I've lived in 9 different states, visited over half of the US, lived in 2 foreign countries (5 years total), and visited 3 others.

I've seen enough of the world and the US to satisfy my needs.

[tubemonkey]

Airline Profits Plunge As Laptop Ban Expands

All the US needs to do to level the playing field again is to ban laptops on all flights to, within, and from the US. Problem solved

Quarterly profits are continuing to roll in across the airline industry and the news isn't good. Dubai-based Emirates Airlines, one of the major carriers that operates direct flights between the United States and the Middle East, just reported a profit dip of 82% year-over-year according to NBC News, on top of an already slow year. The airline attributes the slip primarily to a laptop ban put into place this past March for flights departing from the Middle East to the U.S., directly affecting the business of several carriers in the region (no U.S. carrier flies directly from the Middle East to the United States).

To combat the drop in demand, many Middle Eastern carriers have concocted workarounds to give passengers loaner tablets or laptops, however most of those campaigns are limited to premium cabins and don't account for applications or data that some passengers may need.

Signs of the slowdown started late last month with news that Emirates would cut capacity to the United States. With the laptop ban still in place, profits are continuing to get pummeled as passengers either travel on alternate routes or cancel plans altogether.

[tubemonkey]

Another reason for me not to fly within the US is the upcoming requirement to have some form of enhanced ID in order to board a plane. My current driver's license ($54) will no longer be valid for domestic air travel. I'll need either an enhanced driver's license ($108) or a passport ($110) or a passport card ($30).

I object to having to prove I'm a US citizen in order to fly within my own country and I object to the additional fees involved.

Starting January 22, 2018, passengers with a driver’s license issued by a state that is still not compliant with the REAL ID Act (and has not been granted an extension) will need to show an alternative form of acceptable identification for domestic air travel to board their flight. To check whether your state is compliant or has an extension, click here. Passengers with driver’s licenses issued by a state that is compliant with REAL ID (or a state that has been issued an extension) will still be able to use their driver’s licenses or identification cards.

Starting October 1, 2020, every air traveler will need a REAL ID-compliant license, or another acceptable form of identification, for domestic air travel.

The culprit behind this is:

The REAL ID Act of 2005, Pub.L. 109–13, 119 Stat. 302, enacted May 11, 2005, is an Act of Congress that modifies U.S. federal law pertaining to security, authentication, and issuance procedures standards for the state driver's licenses and identity documents, as well as various immigration issues pertaining to terrorism.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I object to having to prove I'm a US citizen in order to fly within my own country and I object to the additional fees involved.

There's no requirement to be a US citizen; the requirement is simply that you have an acceptable form of ID to prove your identity, and what's acceptable is the government's job to decide. Why doesn't your state issue driving licences that comply with the government's requirements for ID? If the law was passed in 2005, twelve years would seem an adequate period of time for them to do so.

A driving licence is an acceptable form of ID to fly on an internal flight in the UK, although I suspect that in reality most people would use a passport. Unlike in the US, the overwhelming majority of people in Britain have a passport.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

There's no requirement to be a US citizen; the requirement is simply that you have an acceptable form of ID to prove your identity, and what's acceptable is the government's job to decide. Why doesn't your state issue driving licences that comply with the government's requirements for ID? If the law was passed in 2005, twelve years would seem an adequate period of time for them to do so.

And the only acceptable driver's license from Washington after the above date is an enhanced driver's license and that license requires proof of citizenship.

Washington has a limited extension for REAL ID enforcement, allowing Federal agencies to accept driver's licenses from Washington through June 6, 2017.

"Real ID" deadline looms: Proposed fix would leave Washington with two-tiered license

When federal identification standards take effect for air travel in January, Washington residents, like others across the country, will need an enhanced driver’s license or a passport to board a domestic flight. That could be a problem if Washington doesn’t soon comply with federal standards.

Washington state, heavily reliant on a migrant labor force, is the only state in the country that doesn’t verify applicants’ legal residency status when issuing standard driver’s licenses and identification cards. As such, Washington is among five states — Montana, Minnesota, Missouri and Maine are the others — out of compliance with the federal Real ID act, which establishes national standards for state-issued driver’s licenses and personal identification cards.

Under the act — approved by Congress in 2005 — states are required to verify that an applicant is in the U.S. legally before issuing a driver’s license or identification card. Unlike Maine and Montana, which have extensions for compliance that expire in January, Washington, Minnesota and Missouri have exhausted their extensions.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

And the only acceptable driver's license from Washington after the above date is an enhanced driver's license and that license requires proof of citizenship.

That seems like a reasonable enough stipulation. An official state-issued identity document should have checks in the system to ensure that it's only issued to citizens.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

There's no requirement to be a US citizen; the requirement is simply that you have an acceptable form of ID to prove your identity, and what's acceptable is the government's job to decide.

Originally Posted by HarryT

That seems like a reasonable enough stipulation. An official state-issued identity document should have checks in the system to ensure that it's only issued to citizens.

Which one is it?

[HarryT]

Sorry, I think you misunderstood my previous post. You seemed to be implying that only US citizens were allowed to fly on internal US flights. I responded that no, you didn't need to be a US citizen. Eg, I could fly on an internal US flight (and have done so) with my British password proving that I'm a British citizen. You do need a document identifying which country you're a citizen of. That's true pretty much everywhere.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, I think you misunderstood my previous post. You seemed to be implying that only US citizens were allowed to fly on internal US flights. I responded that no, you didn't need to be a US citizen. Eg, I could fly on an internal US flight (and have done so) with my British password proving that I'm a British citizen. You do need a document identifying which country you're a citizen of. That's true pretty much everywhere.

Gotcha, but as an American, I have to prove my citizenship status in order to get a REAL ID-approved driver's license and I strenuously object to that requirement to travel by air within my own country.

Why Real ID Will Cause New Discrimination Against Many US Citizens and Immigrants

BY ACLU IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT

1. Does REAL ID require U.S. citizens to prove that they are citizens?

Yes. Under REAL ID, every person who applies for a driver's license must prove to a DMV clerk that he or she is a U.S. citizen (or legal permanent resident). DMV clerks must decide whether an applicant is a citizen (or qualifying immigrant) before issuing a license. And that type of license issued depends on the applicant's citizenship and immigration status.