Full-body scanners, invasive pat-downs, harsh carry-on restrictions—has the Transportation Security Administration gone too far? Critics and defenders of the TSA tend to talk past each other, so I propose a new approach to answering the question. Let us imagine there were a major airline that could opt out of all TSA regulations. Call it “Liberty Air.” Liberty Air openly advertises that it takes zero safety precautions when it comes to screening passengers and baggage. Would you fly on this airline?
The upside to Liberty Air’s approach is a far more pleasant airport experience. Liberty Air has no metal detectors, so there are no long lines after you get your ticket. Get to the airport ten minutes before take-off, not two hours. Pack whatever you want in your carry-on, including “dangerous” liquids, disposable razors, a hunting knife, whatever. If you have a laptop, don’t worry about taking it out of its case. Wearing a metal belt buckle? Have a lot of keys? Don’t want your Blackberry to leave your sight? No problem. You won’t have to juggle your boarding pass, your driver’s license, your cell phone, and your laptop. No need to take off your shoes. Don’t feel hassled to collect all your belongings pouring out of the X-ray machine—there is no X-ray machine!
Most important of all, Liberty Air does not do body scans. No machine will take revealing photos of you, nor will X-rays zap you, nor will any uniformed official fondle you in the name of national security.
Not only is Liberty Air more pleasant to fly, it’s also easier on your wallet. Free from paying for security officials and upkeep for expensive equipment, Liberty Air passes the savings on to you. No “September 11 security fee” on your bill. You pay only for the flight, not for the TSA bureaucracy.
Of course, there’s an obvious downside to Liberty Air: it is clearly more vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Does the added risk outweigh the benefits? This is the question everyone should ponder. Would you fly Liberty Air, or would you still choose a TSA-compliant airline?
You can read the rest of the article at the above link - but I know that my answer would be, "Hell, yes! I would fly Liberty Air!"
Programs: DL 0.22 MM, AA 0.34 MM, PC Plat Amb, Hertz #1 GC 5*
Posts: 7,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCSherri
You can read the rest of the article at the above link - but I know that my answer would be, "Hell, yes! I would fly Liberty Air!"
Thoughts?
No security? Absolutely not. That's anarchy. It depends what you define as reasonable security.
The aircraft and all supply systems should be secured (fuel, catering, maintenance, etc). The flight deck should be secured, with flight crew willing to continue operations even if people in the cabin are under mortal threat. All cargo and checked luggage should be secured.
All carry-on luggage and pax should be secured against any strategic (and not tactical or operational) aircraft risks.
Have fun with that one.
__________________
"It can't be done" really means "I don't want to"... there's always a way.
DL's rule changes just improves my perl golf.
To bolster the argument, imagine that Liberty Air actually employs a little bit of security. Let’s say it checks IDs against a government database in order to prevent people on a terrorist watch list from boarding. For those of you previously wary of Liberty Air, would you fly it now? Maybe Liberty Air also bans knives and guns from flights. How about now? Maybe it also makes certain high-risk passengers go through metal detectors. Is that enough? I imagine many readers on the fence are now leaning toward Liberty Air. The point is that the security precautions most Americans consider sufficient will likely be far less stringent than those the TSA employs.
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
Location: Northern California, in the redwoods, on the ocean.
Posts: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizabethConley
but only if they promise not to do any of this:
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
In short, Liberty Air is safer than sharing a flying cattle car with a herd of mindless, bleating sheep. I'll take it.
If you look back, the TSA is always one step BEHIND the terrorists- they react with a change AFTER the terrorists pull something off. This last underpants bomber was actually a success based on the all the expense/trouble he has caused.
I suspect the terorists are already working on ways to overcome the last TSA changes.
I feel safer surrounded by people who love liberty than I do in a herd of sheep. I feel more comfortable in a crowd where every man and boy has a pocket knife and every Grannie has a pair of sewing scissors. I am not as afraid of the people my government fears as I am of allowing my government to ban people from flying or monitor citizens' travel. Guns don't distress my as much as banning guns does.
People shouldn't be afraid of their government.
Government should be afraid of their people.
As far as government tyrants are concerned, Judge Lynch never sleeps.
Yes. Absolutely. Fly internally in new Zealand if you want to experience this. Get your BP from a machine, walk onto the plane. That's it. Nothing else. Did about a half dozen such flights last April. Did not worry me in the least. Looking forward to doing this again in jul/aug of this year.
Programs: UA, AS, HH, MR Elite; Mud Tier on BA, B6, FL, Hyatt. All bases covered.
Posts: 12,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by jordanmills
ABSOLUTELY. I'm tired of not being able to carry my sidearm half the time I travel.
And I'm not going to sit next to a stranger packing a sidearm. My disgust with TSA (and the American people for tolerating it) is well-known, but I wouldn't touch Liberty Air. I want reasonable, respectful, COMPETENT security, which we don't have now -- not no security at all.
This is like asking which of two motor vehicles you'd prefer to own: one with a breathalyzer interlock, 50-mph speed governor, no distracting radio, and all cell / navigation features disabled... or one with no seatbelts, airbags, bumpers, brake lights, or anti-skid, and a glass gas tank mounted on the roof. The rational choice is somewhere in between.
__________________
"You'll see a number of changes in the months ahead, and I think you'll be totally enraged." UA CEO Smisek, made accurate
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
That was one of the outrageous, insulting and ridiculous assertions that Pissy made in his testimony before the TSA Senate oversight committee, that (and yes, I am paraphrasing from memory here) if you gave the flying public two options, one a flight on which everyone boarding had been subjected to intensive screening, and the other on which there was no screening, he was "sure" that "everyone" would take the first option.
He should shut the ____ up and ACTUALLY GIVE US THAT OPTION, instead of testifying before Congress about what he is "sure" we would do in his hypothetical situation!
I would not hestitate to take the scary option, the one that would make Pissy piss himself.
And I'm not going to sit next to a stranger packing a sidearm. My disgust with TSA (and the American people for tolerating it) is well-known, but I wouldn't touch Liberty Air. I want reasonable, respectful, COMPETENT security, which we don't have now -- not no security at all.
This is like asking which of two motor vehicles you'd prefer to own: one with a breathalyzer interlock, 50-mph speed governor, no distracting radio, and all cell / navigation features disabled... or one with no seatbelts, airbags, bumpers, brake lights, or anti-skid, and a glass gas tank mounted on the roof. The rational choice is somewhere in between.
Then do not come to Kentucky (or any of several other states). You may indeed end up sitting next to me in any number of public venues and you will almost certainly be sitting next to someone with a concealed firearm. You will never know it except in the very rare instance in which you will find yourself pleased that you were.
And, yes, I would fly Liberty.
__________________
Livingston's observation of complex systems: The purpose of a system is what it does.
