Well, different strokes, I guess. Personally I treat myself well at home with respect to nice restaurants, my home is a lot more comfortable than any hotel, no rental car is as good as our car, and every hour I’m away from my Fierra is an unhappy hour. No benefit of domestic travel, especially when 95% of the time it’s to the same damn places I’ve been to before, is worth the hassle of air travel (international is a different story, of course).
I do know people who love to travel because their home life is so miserable they’d end up in a murder-murder-murder-suicide if they were home more.
I had to do it on a domestic flight between Toronto and Montreal. It took longer to get to the airport and get through security than it did to fly. I came back to Toronto on the train.
Someone here mentioned that the US-style security checks apply to any flight which passes over US territory or has an alternate emergency-landing airport in US territory; if true, this would apply to most domestic flights originating in Toronto.
I’ve flown between Toronto and Calgary a number of times (which, if I remember the pilot’s announcements accurately, overflies Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan), and never had to take my shoes off. I’ve seen other passengers have to, but only a few; it’s not an “every passenger must” situation, as it seems to be in the US.
Update to my above post: just saw this item on CTV News. (I have the TV on in the background.) Anyway, it seems Canadian airport security officers cannot require passengers to remove their shoes unless the passenger is going to the US or the shoes cause the metal detector to go off. The story implies that this is longstanding policy, but that front-line screeners needed a reminder.
I love the whole business travel thing when its an occasional treat. A lot of business trips in a short time frame gets old fast - even when the hotels are really nice and the vendor has an open ended expense account. That seems to be pretty common - the more you travel on business, the less appealing business travel is. But some people do travel all the time and love it.
All of my air travel has been within the U.S., so I’ve never had to deal with the passport issues. But back in '03, I flew from New Orleans to Buffalo via Detroit with a broken hand and a bright blue cast on my right arm.
At Moisant (MSY) I went through the metal detector, which didn’t go off. Then they wanded my cast several times. Then they tested the cast for explosives and let me through. Not bad. Took 5 minutes at the most.
In Detroit, the wife and I decided to step out into the parking garage for a smoke. As we neared the point of no return, we were debating on whether we had enough time and were trying to see how long the security line was. I wasn’t paying attention and stepped across the yellow line, which committed us to going through security again. We had a cigarette and got back in line and I was subjected to more tests, but nothing major. We ended up running to the gate to get on our next flight. (Every time I’ve flown through DTW, My plane has landed in the A78 area and the connecting flight is somewhere around A1, which is about 1/2 mile away and the little train runs from somewhere around A20 to A40, so there’s no way to not have to walk or run a great distance to get from one gate to the other.)
Coming back, Buffalo hardly gave a second glance at the cast, but we ended up stuck in Detroit for about 8 hours. The flight kept getting delayed and eventually canceled and over the course of that 8 hours, we went through security 4 or 5 times to go outside to smoke. By the third time, one of the TSA people remembered my name, but they still had to check the cast for explosives each time.
This next paragraph is entirely off the subject, but why the hell can’t they figure out some way to allow people to smoke, without going through security? I know some airports have 2-drink minimum smoking lounges that are sealed off from the concourse and resemble a smoky boiler room, but most don’t. MSY used to have a bar that had a small balcony that looked out onto a concrete wall, but you didn’t have to go through security to have a cigarette. I guess someone could’ve jumped down from the balcony and run out onto the tarmac and hijacked a plane though.
All they’d need to do is have a door leading to the outside, build a 12 foot high brick wall all the way around it and put electrified chain link over the top so the smoke could escape but “terrorists” couldn’t. Throw in a couple of concrete blocks to sit on and a couple of ashtrays. It doesn’t have to be pretty, just give the smokers a break.
Modern Americans apparently think smoking is EVIL, that’s why. They won’t give you smoking lounges because they’re trying to punish you. It’s ridiculous. I think smoker’s lounges should be just as common as bars. They’re both legal substances to put in your body, and alcohol is WORSE for you. This is also why the cost of smoking has gone through the roof. TAX THE EVIL SMOKERS FOR THEIR LUXURY! If they taxed alcohol like they tax cigarettes, people would be marching on congress. [/former smoker rant]
*Actually, I’m not really a FORMER smoker, more of a lapsed smoker. I’m looking forward to my first cigarette 6 months after baby.
Yeah, what’s evil about giving money to tobacco companies that lied for years about the effects of smoking and then have to be heavily regulated to not market their addictive and unhealthy products to children?
So don’t go into the smoking area then. Denver, St. Louis, and Cincinnati all have enclosed, reasonably well-ventilated, and labelled smoking areas. I find it hard to believe that non-smokers are going to stumble into them by accident.
This will have ZERO effect on the current airline security policies. But if it makes you feel better or empowered, go for it. Just don’t fool yourself into thinking it will make any difference whatsoever.
I believe Una must have made that statement in the full awareness that the public would not have the backbone to follow through (But you are right in that our elected representatives would care more about looking tough on security and protecting the corporations “because they are the ones that create jobs” than about a consumer revolt)
Not nearly as often as I’d like, unfortunately. I’m currently studying so I don’t get any travel in, but last year I was working on a project at my job and spent a month travelling around the state helping at various stores. Didn’t bother me at all.
Then again, I like travelling. A lot. To me, having a job that involved lots of international travel and an unlimited expense account would be like winning Lotto.
It’s funny, but I pass through Ben-Gurion about twice a year. Their first tier is interviewing people in the security line, and if you strike them as calm and friendly they pass you straight through. I’ve had my luggage opened once in the last ten years, and last time I didn’t even have to pass though the X-ray (with my luggage). And no bloody nonsense about removing shoes either.
The TSA really ought to have a chat with the Israelis.
Come work for us Martini, sure you don’t travel around the world, but you’d do a bit around Australia. And you wouldn’t get an unlimited expense account, but the ~$100 tax free allowance per day covers most reasonable expenses. I just spent four days in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands :).
I quite like traveling personally, and no, I wouldn’t be looking at a divorce or murder suicide if I spent more time at home. I spend a bit over 50% of my time living out of a hotel and it’s pretty good. I get hotel rooms with cooking facilities and sometimes laundry facilities as well so I can make myself at home*. I’ve also left a bicycle at my primary travel destination so I get around on that a bit. It’s like a home away from home!
