Why do they now want it before the plane takes off?
And I must say that your aggressive attitude lumps you with Airman Doors as one of the reasons why people tend to see (falsely) all Americans as jingoistic, inward looking, over-sensitive buffoons.
So it makes sense to ask for a contact address of a friend on the assumption you’d never lie about that, but not to ask for hotel information? Your distinction does not compute.
Mm-hmmm. So procedures at your airport (which you are not pitting) take you 3 hours, during which you can’t find a convenient moment to fill in a couple lines on a card?
I’m starting to agree with “nutter”. Pretty soon you’ll be starting rants about how Homeland Security is beaming x-rays at you and monitoring your bathroom visits. :rolleyes:
No, it has to do with sending off a complete passenger manifest including credit card number used, name, home address given, to the US for consideration before the flight takes off. If a flight is in mid air with a person on board that is ‘suspicious’ then the flight is diverted at great cost to the airline. I think they wait for initial clearance of the list before take-off.
Even before 9/11 I found INS and Customs personnel to be the most surly unfriendly people in the whole US- I used to think that they must have trawled really hard to find such difficult, moody, unfriendly, jobsworths from a population that is universally friendly and helpful in all customer-client relations. In fact they were so surly it reminded me of normal customer service in the UK in the seventies!
How much time does this add to check-in at the airport? I would supsect most people would fill out the form while standing in line, no? And, if the US customs wants to cross-check with any databases, wouldn’t it be better to do so before the plane lands and not after (or, even better, before the plane takes off)? Maybe this will cut down on time getting thru customs at the other end.
What’s wrong, Pjen, you weren’t get much traction in your other Pit thread, so you decided to up the stakes?
And you want to travel here. If I were to go to another country I can all but guarantee (in fact, I CAN guarantee) that I will find rquirements that I find to be particularly onerous. Guess what? I do them anyway. Pointless? Perhaps. But I don’t deign to call their procedures idiotic, because it’s their country, it’s their rules, and by entering their country I have essentially entered into an agreement to abide by their rules. If that means that I have to dump out the contents of all of my bags to demonstrate that I have no contraband, that’s what I do. If that means that I submit myself to a background check, that’s what I do. If that means that I tell them where I will be when I get there, I do it. The alternative is to stay home.
So, again, boo hoo hoo. You’re breaking my heart. If you know it’s bullshit, just put down whatever you want to and go about your business. It’s your call if you want to tell everyone how easy it is to get over on the government, but I think you’re being a putz by doing it.
That wasn’t my question. You seem to be primarily concerned with the added check-in time this particular procedural change will cause. How much time, exactly, will filling out this form add to check-in time? I can see that it probably will add some, but I think that time will be measured in seconds, not minutes.
It wasn’t even an attack, so there’s no need to defend.
It wasn’t even a criticism of America the Beautiful and Free. It was a criticism of mindless beurocratic crap.
Perhaps you love mindless bureaucratic crap, and if so, by all means jump to the defense of mindless bureaucrats. But do so without the kneejerk call to man the battlements against the foul hoards of furriners.
Fortunately for me I’ve only been in Iraq for a few scant hours. Mostly I’ve been above it.
But yeah, if there are rules I am required to follow them. I didn’t DARE try to smuggle liquor into Kuwait, for instance. I had to all but get undressed on the way in and on the way out. Their country, their rules. Bullshit? Of course. It’s just booze. But it’s a dry country, and that’s that.
An agreement to abide by rules is completely different from surrendering your reason and saying “I have no right to have an opinion regarding whether this rule should be in place.” Everyone has a right to express an opinion, even if it’s about someone else’s rules. And I have a legitimate right to declare a rule idiotic even if it’s someone else’s country that’s imposing it.
Observation, analysis, reason, dissent. Without these in constant operation, you’re not living an intelligent life.
I do the same, in that when I go to a foreign country I abide by their rules as per forms, inspections, etc. I do not, however, relenquish my right to bitch about it. There is no reason not to complain about an idiotic policy. Hey, if enough people do and it is found to be worthless, then maybe they will get rid of it. Doesn’t stop me from travelling though.
Don’t take me too seriously: I wasn’t really having a dig - it was just a wide open goal for an easy punchline.
Which is precisely what pjen is saying. He’s not seeking to contravene these rules, and if he has to go to the US he will abide by them. Just that he thinks they’re bullshit.
Every country’s got bullshit bureaucratic rules. The new US immigration procedures are particularly pointless, but then again, they pale into insignificance alongside the amount of hassle I’m having trying to import an Irish car into the UK.
Here’s the problem I have with the OP. He reads something about the US that he doesn’t like, but doesn’t understand. Instead of first trying to understand, he opens a Pit thread to bash the US. Question silly procedures all you want, but make sure you at least try to understand them before you bash them. You can hurt your nose with your knee that way if you’re not careful! And, the OP couldn’t even be troubled to provide a link-- always throws up suspicion if you ask me.
Just off the top of my head, this seems like a neutral move, at worst, but possibly a smart one. What the hell difference does it make if you do this on the take-off end or the landing end? You’re going to “slow things down” somewhere. But, if you are going to do it, why do it on the landing end? That only allows a reactive response if a red flag is raised. By having this information before take-off, you can be proactive.
But I’m just speculating. Here’s some info from the US Customs web site concerning the details of the program that I assume this rant is about. It doesn’t really go into the reasons for the program, but does outline what has to be done. Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) Fact Sheet