TSA lines are so out of control that travelers are hiring line-sitters

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Long airport security lines in the U.S. have become so severe that entrepreneurs are offering paid “line-sitting” and concierge services to help travelers bypass TSA queues, raising questions about fairness and access. Commenters contrast overcrowded federal checkpoints with smoother experiences at airports that use private contractors, debate whether TSA’s funding model and security value justify its current form, and highlight how premium services and private jets let wealthier travelers largely avoid the hassle. The conversation also touches on broader issues of security theater, government inefficiency, and the ways market solutions can both relieve and exacerbate inequities.

Archiving the article & archive.is debate

  • Some discuss using archive.ph to bypass paywalls, noting it effectively DDoSes the origin with users’ browsers; impact allegedly mitigated by Cloudflare but seen as ethically questionable.
  • Concerns raised about archive.today domains: DNS poisoning, occasional content tampering, and their reputation issues.
  • One commenter experiments with alternatives (SingleFile, PDF to archive.org, anonymous hosting like catbox.moe), worried about legality, clutter, and abuse of any new archiving service.
  • Sympathy and unease expressed about the anonymous archive.is operator and prior “doxing/DDOS drama”; motivations on both sides seen as nuanced.

Cultural context: line-sitters in Indian temples

  • Line-sitters are described as common at Indian temples, where queues can exceed five hours.
  • Explanations: family lineage temples (“kuladeivam”), local significance, special events, and a subset of temples that are crowded year-round.
  • Temples are framed as enhancing the “quality” of worship rather than being strictly required.
  • Status and displays of devotion also seen as drivers of long lines.

How bad are TSA lines, really?

  • Multiple travelers report recent experiences at major airports with minimal waits, suggesting the crisis is uneven and highly airport/time dependent.
  • Some note specific examples (e.g., Essential Air Service airports, SFO, LAX) where lines are short or unchanged.

Airport security models: TSA vs private contractors

  • SFO is cited as using a private contractor under TSA’s Screening Partnership Program; some say this “buffer” helps maintain staffing during funding issues.
  • A list of other such airports is referenced; some predict more airports will join.
  • Others argue all airport security should be privatized and funded by user fees rather than treated as a federal jobs program.

Paid line-skipping services and inequality

  • The article’s mention of concierge services that legally escort travelers through staff/crew lines is highlighted as the real story.
  • Airports reportedly discourage informal line-sitters while allowing these premium services, which some equate to institutionalized queue-jumping.
  • Comments frame this as capitalism “solving” a problem it helps create; others just note that private jet users have always bypassed standard queues.

Should private jets be screened by TSA?

  • One side: private flights serve small, known groups; TSA is meant to protect the general public on common carriers, so screening private passengers is unnecessary.
  • Other side: TSA exists to prevent planes from being used as weapons; private jets can also hit buildings and thus should not be exempt.
  • Counterarguments emphasize:
    • Many other attack vectors (e.g., trucks, small planes) can cause damage; risk scaling is complicated.
    • Government security responses are reactive and may expand only after a private-plane-based attack.
    • Practical effect: even if TSA were imposed on private terminals, elites likely still wouldn’t see lines.
  • Some criticize commenters for “defending the privileged,” while others say freedom of movement shouldn’t be restricted based on wealth.

TSA funding, fees, and federal budgeting

  • The per-ticket TSA fee (~$5.60) is discussed; commenters note it covers only a small fraction (around one-fifth) of total TSA costs.
  • Most such fees flow into the general fund or debt reduction; Congress must still appropriate TSA’s actual budget.
  • Several explain that the U.S. system doesn’t automatically earmark fees for the collecting agency; that’s a policy choice.
  • Examples are given of other agencies where user fees do directly fund operations, allowing them to keep running during shutdowns.
  • Some suggest Congress could have set up TSA similarly but chose not to.

Effectiveness and necessity of TSA procedures

  • Strong criticism from some: claim that hijacking by small blades is obsolete due to reinforced cockpit doors and changed passenger behavior; argue basic gun screening would suffice and TSA should be disbanded.
  • A proposed “fly at your own risk” model would minimize security while keeping cockpits secure; a rebuttal notes this doesn’t prevent suicide attacks into buildings.
  • Queue management at busy checkpoints is criticized as failing basic fairness/queueing theory, with premium programs (Global Entry, Clear, TSA Pre) getting priority.

Media framing and political/personal angles

  • One close reading of the article notes that only a handful of travelers (possibly just one client of one entrepreneur) have actually used airport line-sitting, implying the headline exaggerates the trend.
  • Jokes speculate about politicians monetizing priority access even more aggressively, or weaponizing TSA Pre-check against political opponents.
  • A traveler admits to routinely slipping into first-class/priority lines by looking confident; another contrasts this with people facing basic financial hardship, underscoring inequality themes.