[melody_calling]

That does sound feasible. There are a number of airports (SFO probably being the largest) that have their security screening performed by non-TSA third-party companies, which I suppose is the ultimate political embarrasment lever to pull.

[schoen]

Currently 19, I think: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screening_Partnership_Program

[bogomipz]

The last time I was there it was still TSA. How is it? Are they more courteous and/or efficient?

[fragmede]

SFO hasn't had TSA.

https://www.sfgate.com/travel/article/answering-holiday-trav...

[AntiRush]

It's been that way since 2005. It's pretty much indistinguishable from TSA other than the badges on the uniforms.

[snakeyjake]

> It's pretty much indistinguishable from TSA

It has never been, is not, and will never be, different. Instead of paying fees to TSA SFO pays slightly more to the contractor doing the job. It's the same. Same rules, same procedure, same equipment. Same, same, same. The only difference is the patches on the shirts.

Everyone in here has cultural amnesia about air travel in the 90s.

The current system is TEN BILLION TIMES better than post-lockerbie.