there have been many observations [comments] re the enhanced? security being window dressing for us old people or non frequent flyers. has anyone met someone who feels more safe?

As I reported elsewhere, I have been virtually unable to have an intelligent discussion of the merits of the new "security" procedures with anyone who is NOT a frequent flyer. Almost all other people believe that all the nonsense taking place at airports these days is justified, and I have not been able to persuade them otherwise. The politicians and others with real power won't demand change unless the public does, and that's generally not happening. It seems hopeless to me, unfortunately.

Bruce

It's almost hopeless....I've talked to my father who used to be a FF 25 years ago and while he agree that some of the steps being taken are silly, he also think others are good idea. His main point was we should just accept that business flyers will have to "slow" down, live without carryons, except for small ones like purses and books, and other certain steps, like ridiclous idea that connecting pax should go through security again (very much like international connecting pax have to go through security after custom, etc).

And he is very smart and rational guy.

Oh and he used to be a private pilot and nowday he and Mom will not fly whenever possible, because in their words, travel by air got so unpleasant.

[This message has been edited by UA_Eagle (edited 01-09-2002).]

I agree with you Bruce. It is virtually useless to have a discussion with the non flyer or once a year flyer. They just don't get it. And I am afraid I could "stress out" if I hear that da*n statement " it that is what it takes to be safe" again. How stupid can so many people be?

Apparently 75 year old Congressman John Dingell (D-MI) does. He had to take off his pants to show security personnel he had metal in his surgically replaced hip. On the news he was totally complacent because the inconvenience was necessary for *security*.
If he were in my district, he'd get an earful but not my vote.

Yes, and Dingell has a well-deserved reputation for being a very tough guy. Ask any witness at one of the hearings he used to run when he was a committee chairman (back when the Democrats were the majority in the House). And even he is a sheeple! I'm just amazed.

Anyway, what did the "security" screener see when he gazed at the naked body of Rep. Dingell? Could he see the metal hip that was implanted 20 years ago? I don't think so. What was the point?

Bruce

They can run the wand against his naked skin and see that it still goes off, thus indicating that it is, indeed, something inside his body that is setting the detectors off. I'm not saying that I agree with this practice, I'm just explaining the rationale behind doing this.

I don't feel safer or should it be more safe?

I just felt it's an hassle to take off my belts and shoes 7 out of 10 times.