Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Homeland Severity Chertoff: ID must comply to fly

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080321/...ver_s_licenses

    WASHINGTON - Homeland security officials on Friday hinted at a possible face-saving deal to end their standoff with a handful of states over new driver's license rules — a dispute that, left unresolved, could cause big air travel headaches.

    For weeks, the Homeland Security Department has been headed toward a showdown with some states over a law called Real ID, which would require new security measures for state-issued driver's licenses. Yet a late Good Friday letter from a top DHS official suggested Washington may be backing away from a messy fight.

    South Carolina, Maine and Montana are the only states that have not sought extensions to comply, or already started toward compliance with Real ID, which was passed after the 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington.

    On Friday, the federal agency granted Montana an extension, even though state officials didn't ask for one and insist they will not adhere to the Real ID law.
    Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer told The Associated Press that DHS "painted themselves in a corner."

    A fourth state, New Hampshire, has asked to be exempted, but Homeland Security officials have not found that letter legally acceptable, so the Granite State has not received an extension.

    Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff had warned that if holdout states do not send a letter by the end of March seeking an extension, come May, residents of such states will no longer be able to use their driver's licenses as valid ID to board airplanes or enter federal buildings.

    Such travelers would instead have to present a passport or be subjected to secondary screening. [Papieren bitte? <--see the question mark]

    Five senators — Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Jon Tester and Max Baucus of Montana, and John Sununu of New Hampshire — appealed to Chertoff last week to exempt all 50 states from the looming deadline.

    Chertoff responded that it was not he but Congress that picked the date when the law went into effect in 2005.

    "You may disagree with the foregoing law, but I cannot ignore it," Chertoff said in the letter. [Chust follow the orders.]

    The law, he said, is necessary for national security according to recommendations from the commission that studied the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

    Yet hours after Chertoff sent those letters Friday, DHS Assistant Secretary Stewart Baker wrote to the attorney general of Montana, saying that even though the state was explicitly not seeking an extension, it would be granted one anyway. Baker reasoned the state's new license security measures already met many of the Real ID requirements anyway.

    "I can only provide the relief you are seeking by treating your letter as a request for an extension," Baker wrote.

    Schweitzer, Montana's Democratic governor, said his state had not backed down.
    "We sent them a horse. If they choose to call it a zebra, that is their business," said Schweitzer.

    The agency's approach to Montana could provide an easy way out for the remaining states resistant to Real ID — and suggests the federal government doesn't want to go ahead with its plan to conduct extra screening on residents of certain states.
    If the two sides can't cut a face-saving deal, Chertoff has offered a blunt warning to those critics who claim the government is bluffing. "Showing up at the airport with only a driver's license from such a state will be no better than showing up without identification," he wrote to the senators. "No doubt this will impel many to choose the inconvenience of traveling with a passport."

    The end of the standoff with Montana does not necessarily mean the entire fight is over.

    South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford was considering legal action, and the state's attorney general was preparing an opinion on whether the governor would have a case if he decided to sue the federal government. A spokesman for Attorney General Henry McMaster said the opinion will be released Monday.

    Chertoff has offered a plan to gradually implement Real ID requirements over a period of 10 years, so that eventually all driver's licenses would have several layers of security features to prevent forgery. They would also be issued only after a number of identity checks, including immigration status and verification of birth certificates.
    Critics of the plan say it is too expensive, an invasion of privacy, and won't actually make the country safer.

    Safety is a tyrant's tool; no one can be against safety.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Eagle, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    Hell with them then, I'm staying put, the Airlines/Airports can go Bankrupt for All I care.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    They keep trying and the grubbermint keeps pickin' up the tab - and that's called? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Economic_planning

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    The only, and I mean ONLY reason for attaching Real ID to a DL is to fool the mass of sheeple into thinking that it's NOT an 'internal passport'.

    That's it.
    End of story.


    Just look at the 'alternative' they offer.... strike that... REQUIRE for 'non-complient' DL's...












































    A FARKING PASSPORT!!





  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    My fiancee says we ain't movin' to no Montana. :X

    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  6. #6
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    My favorite part.

    the federal agency granted Montana an extension, even though state officials didn't ask for one and insist they will not adhere to the Real ID law.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    My favorite part.

    the federal agency granted Montana an extension, even though state officials didn't ask for one and insist they will not adhere to the Real ID law.
    The feds know how embarassing it will look if they actually carry out their threat against Montana citizens, so they're trying to buy time while still playing the tough guy.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran Nelson_Muntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    Post imported post

    ~$5k and a few hours of your time will get you a VFR license to pilot a single engine aircraft. In and out of regional airports, you will not have to go through TSA. Aircraft rental and Av fuel can be cheaper than some commercial flights and you can come and go on your own schedule. And make stops along the way if you desire.

    A private pilot license is the Open Carry of the aviation travel world.

  9. #9
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.
    Has anyone ever tried that??

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    BASE jumpers?

    I did an eleven-hundred foot free rappel (The Rostrum, Yosemite NP) - not flying but no screening either.

  12. #12
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    I believe the effective date is in May. I'm tempted to fly with no ID sometime after that.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    218

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Chertoff responded that it was not he but Congress that picked the date when the law went into effect in 2005.

    "You may disagree with the foregoing law, but I cannot ignore it," Chertoff said in the letter. [Chust follow the orders.]

    The law, he said, is necessary for national security according to recommendations from the commission that studied the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
    Does anybody know which law that Chertoff is claiming that Congress has passed to force all the states to follow the whims of DHS??

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    VAopencarry wrote:
    I believe the effective date is in May. I'm tempted to fly with no ID sometime after that.
    As long as you're willing to eat the cost of an airline ticket.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.
    Has anyone ever tried that??
    - Yes -

    It's a little known fact that if you show up to an airline counter without any ID they will make a mark on your boarding pass. When you get to the checkpoint, the TSA will give you one of those nice RED bins instead of the normal gray ones. You get through with an extra pat down and wanding, and your bags get an extra "going-through" and you are on your way. This only works within the US, since crossing a border you have to have your Passport anyway.


    -Sorry for the "anonymity" (first post, brand new account) these are still matters of some secrecy, and I don't want to put myself in a sticky position.

    http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog...nd-skip-lines/


  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    flyer wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.
    Has anyone ever tried that??
    - Yes -

    It's a little known fact that if you show up to an airline counter without any ID they will make a mark on your boarding pass. When you get to the checkpoint, the TSA will give you one of those nice RED bins instead of the normal gray ones. You get through with an extra pat down and wanding, and your bags get an extra "going-through" and you are on your way. This only works within the US, since crossing a border you have to have your Passport anyway.


    -Sorry for the "anonymity" (first post, brand new account) these are still matters of some secrecy, and I don't want to put myself in a sticky position.

    http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog...nd-skip-lines/
    Welcome to OCDO.

    Some of us appreciate the need for anonymity to protect one's special knowledge. Unfortunately, "Secrecy" is an appeal to authority of special knowlege with an implicit personal attack, 'I know this because I am a powerful person and you cannot because you are not.'

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority. argumentum ad verecundiam <==> argumentum ad hominem are contrapositives.

    It will usually be challenged. I followed your links to the TSA letter that mentioned your topics but saw no statutory citation, merely a bald assertion of TSA authority.

    But. without reservation, welcome to OCDO.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.
    Has anyone ever tried that??
    Yes.

    http://www.wired.com/science/discove.../2006/06/71115

    If you want to do it, it might be a good idea to take along a copy of the Gilbert v Gonzales ruling. And be prepared for some hassle, even though every case I've read of went very smoothly.

  18. #18
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    There was a group called the "Freedom Fliers" a ways back - they were mailing their DLs home and forcing airlines to fly them - worked out fine apparently. But a secret "key" to doing this is as follows: (1) Don;t have any ID on you - just tell them you don;t have any; (2) If there is confusion by the airline or TSA employee, just calmly say "Well, sorry about this, guess I'll just have to go thru secondary screening today."

    This clues everybody in that you are reasonable and knowledgeable - it will help to dressed nice, etc., and remember, airlines are common carriers, generally required to transport you by law.

    If anybody actually tries to enforce REAL ID at airports, the resulting massive requirement for letting these folks thru will expose the secondary screening loophole to the alleged "ID requirement."

    The ID rule needs to be done away with before mission creep on this eventually make its way to open carry law, requiring people to have ID to OC.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    If anybody actually tries to enforce REAL ID at airports, the resulting massive requirement for letting these folks thru will expose the secondary screening loophole to the alleged "ID requirement."
    Which will quickly sink the attempt to enforce REAL ID. DHS really has no way to make this stick if even a handful of states stick to their guns.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    flyer wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Mike wrote:
    but remember folks, if youhave no ID, you can still fly, provided you endure secondary screening - even Chertoff has said this.
    Has anyone ever tried that??
    - Yes -

    It's a little known fact that if you show up to an airline counter without any ID they will make a mark on your boarding pass. When you get to the checkpoint, the TSA will give you one of those nice RED bins instead of the normal gray ones. You get through with an extra pat down and wanding, and your bags get an extra "going-through" and you are on your way. This only works within the US, since crossing a border you have to have your Passport anyway.


    -Sorry for the "anonymity" (first post, brand new account) these are still matters of some secrecy, and I don't want to put myself in a sticky position.

    http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog...nd-skip-lines/
    Welcome to OCDO.

    Some of us appreciate the need for anonymity to protect one's special knowledge. Unfortunately, "Secrecy" is an appeal to authority of special knowlege with an implicit personal attack, 'I know this because I am a powerful person and you cannot because you are not.'

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority. argumentum ad verecundiam <==> argumentum ad hominem are contrapositives.

    It will usually be challenged. I followed your links to the TSA letter that mentioned your topics but saw no statutory citation, merely a bald assertion of TSA authority.

    But. without reservation, welcome to OCDO.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******
    I misspoke saying "secrecy" but I only meant it under the following context: I was given information that I was told not to share- However, every 12 dollar-an-hour airline ticket agent is given the same information and told not to share it...It's hardly a secret, more along the lines of non-public information. It's not anything that can't be deduced from some trial and error, or from reading between the lines of what Chertoff said.

    I am no better or worse than anyone else, and that is why I chose to share.

    Thanks for the welcome.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •